[Due for payment 2026-03-13] [$250] Attendee-Attendees added again after updating the expense amount

[nlemma]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: v9.3.3-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: #79050
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): testpayment935@gmail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Bug source: Pull Request QA execution
Device used: Windows 11 pro /Chrome
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

1. Navigate to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Create WS and enable Rules
3. Enable attendee tracking
4. Create expense and 3 attendees in the expense
5. Split the expense
6. Go to one of the split and remove one attendee
7. Update the amount
8. Go to attendee

Expected Result:

The unselected attendee should not marked again

Actual Result:

Attendees added again after updating the expense amount

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: App
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: App
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• iOS: mWeb Chrome
• Windows: Chrome
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screenshots/Videos

Bug7050354_1768500400677.bandicam_2026-01-15_20-51-15-616.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~022013065087772039537
• Upwork Job ID: 2013065087772039537
• Last Price Increase: 2026-02-02

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @cristipaval

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @mallenexpensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @RachCHopkins (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[nkdengineer]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Attendees added again after updating the expense amount

What is the root cause of that problem?

When updating split expense, we always pass the attendees as the original transaction's attendee then the attendee is reverted after editing the split expense.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

Line 13514 in e94f05d

attendees: originalTransactionDetails?.attendees,

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

When we initiate the split expense data here we should add attendees here as the current transaction's attendee

attendees: transactionDetails?.attendees,

App/src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

Lines 13058 to 13070 in e94f05d

	return {
	transactionID: transactionID ?? transactionDetails?.transactionID ?? String(CONST.DEFAULT_NUMBER_ID),
	amount: amount ?? transactionDetails?.amount ?? 0,
	description: transactionDetails?.comment,
	category: transactionDetails?.category,
	tags: transaction?.tag ? [transaction?.tag] : [],
	created: created ?? transactionDetails?.created ?? DateUtils.formatWithUTCTimeZone(DateUtils.getDBTime(), CONST.DATE.FNS_FORMAT_STRING),
	merchant: transaction?.modifiedMerchant ? transaction.modifiedMerchant : (transaction?.merchant ?? ''),
	statusNum: currentReport?.statusNum ?? 0,
	reportID: reportID ?? transaction?.reportID ?? String(CONST.DEFAULT_NUMBER_ID),
	reimbursable: transactionDetails?.reimbursable,
	};
	}

And then use it here instead

attendees: splitExpense.attendees ?? originalTransactionDetails?.attendees,

App/src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

Line 13514 in e94f05d

attendees: originalTransactionDetails?.attendees,

Or we can get the attendees from splitTransaction

attendees: splitTransaction?.comment?.attendees ?? originalTransactionDetails?.attendees,

App/src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

Line 13514 in e94f05d

attendees: originalTransactionDetails?.attendees,

We can also check for other fields to see if they have the same problem

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

We can disable the attendees for split expense if we always want it's the value of the original transaction

Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

[annaweber830]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

The unselected attendee should not marked again

What is the root cause of that problem?

The attendees step initializes its local state from the “original” attendee list (transaction.comment.attendees) rather than the current edited attendee list (transaction.modifiedAttendees when present). After an amount edit, the UI can re-hydrate from the older comment.attendees value, causing previously removed attendees to appear selected again.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

Update the attendee selector step to initialize from the current attendees (prefer modifiedAttendees, otherwise fall back to comment.attendees) so it reflects the user’s latest selection even after an amount update.

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepAttendees.tsx

Line 51 in 8f123f4

const [attendees, setAttendees] = useState<Attendee[]>(() => getOriginalAttendees(transaction, currentUserPersonalDetails));

const [attendees, setAttendees] = useState<Attendee[]>(() => getAttendees(transaction, currentUserPersonalDetails));

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Changing the amount-update flow to always preserve/merge attendees in the transaction comment payload.

[yatin-italy]

Proposal

Restate the problem this issue is trying to solve.

When a split expense amount is changed, the edit draft is rebuilt. During this rebuild, attendees are taken again from the original transaction. This overwrites any attendees the user already removed. The removed attendees appear again, which breaks the edit flow.

What is the root cause of that problem?

The earliest wrong assumption is that attendees should always be read from the original transaction. In src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts, the function initDraftSplitExpenseDataForEdit assumes transactionDetails?.attendees is always the correct source. This is wrong because the user may have already changed attendees in the draft. When the draft is reinitialized, this assumption causes the function to ignore the existing draft state and replace modified attendees with the original ones.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

• Add a connected Onyx collection for split transaction drafts.
• Read attendees from the existing split draft if present.
• Fall back to original transaction attendees only if no draft attendees exist.
• Merge the updated draft instead of replacing it.

File to modify:
src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

Add connected collection for split transaction drafts (after line 830, following the allTransactionDrafts pattern):

let allSplitTransactionDrafts: NonNullable<OnyxCollection<OnyxTypes.Transaction>> = {};

Onyx.connect({
    key: ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.SPLIT_TRANSACTION_DRAFT,
    waitForCollectionCallback: true,
    callback: (value) => {
        allSplitTransactionDrafts = value ?? {};
    },
});

Modify initDraftSplitExpenseDataForEdit function (lines 13432–13462):

function initDraftSplitExpenseDataForEdit(
    draftTransaction: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Transaction>,
    splitExpenseTransactionID: string,
    reportID: string,
) {
    if (!draftTransaction || !splitExpenseTransactionID) {
        return;
    }

    const originalTransactionID = draftTransaction?.comment?.originalTransactionID;
    const originalTransaction = allTransactions?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${originalTransactionID}`];
    const splitTransactionData = draftTransaction?.comment?.splitExpenses?.find(
        (item) => item.transactionID === splitExpenseTransactionID,
    );
    const transactionDetails = getTransactionDetails(originalTransaction);

    const existingDraft =
        allSplitTransactionDrafts[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.SPLIT_TRANSACTION_DRAFT}${CONST.IOU.OPTIMISTIC_TRANSACTION_ID}`];

    const preservedAttendees =
        existingDraft?.modifiedAttendees ??
        existingDraft?.comment?.attendees ??
        transactionDetails?.attendees;

    const editDraftTransaction = buildOptimisticTransaction({
        existingTransactionID: CONST.IOU.OPTIMISTIC_TRANSACTION_ID,
        originalTransactionID,
        transactionParams: {
            amount: Number(splitTransactionData?.amount),
            currency: transactionDetails?.currency ?? CONST.CURRENCY.USD,
            comment: splitTransactionData?.description,
            tag: splitTransactionData?.tags?.at(0),
            merchant: splitTransactionData?.merchant,
            participants: draftTransaction?.participants,
            attendees: preservedAttendees as Attendee[],
            reportID,
            created: splitTransactionData?.created ?? '',
            category: splitTransactionData?.category ?? '',
        },
    });

    Onyx.merge(
        `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.SPLIT_TRANSACTION_DRAFT}${CONST.IOU.OPTIMISTIC_TRANSACTION_ID}`,
        editDraftTransaction,
    );

    Navigation.navigate(
        ROUTES.SPLIT_EXPENSE_EDIT.getRoute(
            reportID,
            originalTransactionID,
            splitTransactionData?.transactionID,
            Navigation.getActiveRoute(),
        ),
    );
}

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Reading attendees only from the original transaction was considered but not chosen because it still drops user changes during draft reinitialization.

[SIMalik]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

In the Money Request flow, when an attendee is removed and the expense amount is updated, the removed attendee remains selected.

What is the root cause of that problem?

The attendees state in IOURequestStepAttendees.tsx was only initialized from the transaction’s original comment (comment.attendees) and did not properly account for modified attendees (modifiedAttendees). When the transaction updates (for example, after changing the expense amount), the UI re-hydrates from the old comment.attendees, causing previously removed attendees to appear selected again. React did not re-render correctly because the state logic did not differentiate between external transaction updates and user interactions.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

Update imports in IOURequestStepAttendees.tsx

Replace

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepAttendees.tsx

Line 2 in e94f05d

import React, {useCallback, useState} from 'react';

with

import React, {useCallback, useState, useEffect} from 'react';

and

Replace attendees state declaration

App/src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepAttendees.tsx

Line 39 in e94f05d

const [attendees, setAttendees] = useState<Attendee[]>(() => getOriginalAttendees(transaction, currentUserPersonalDetails));

with

const getCurrentAttendees = () => {
    if (!transaction) return [];
    return transaction.modifiedAttendees ?? transaction.comment?.attendees ?? [];
};

const [attendees, setAttendees] = useState<Attendee[]>(() => getCurrentAttendees());

Add below the attendees state declaration

useEffect(() => {
    const current = getCurrentAttendees();
    if (!deepEqual(attendees, current)) {
        setAttendees(current);
    }
}, [transaction, currentUserPersonalDetails]);

79746.mp4

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[melvin-bot]

📣 @SIMalik! 📣
Hey, it seems we don’t have your contributor details yet! You'll only have to do this once, and this is how we'll hire you on Upwork.
Please follow these steps:

1. Make sure you've read and understood the contributing guidelines.
2. Get the email address used to login to your Expensify account. If you don't already have an Expensify account, create one here. If you have multiple accounts (e.g. one for testing), please use your main account email.
3. Get the link to your Upwork profile. It's necessary because we only pay via Upwork. You can access it by logging in, and then clicking on your name. It'll look like this. If you don't already have an account, sign up for one here.
4. Copy the format below and paste it in a comment on this issue. Replace the placeholder text with your actual details.
   
   Format:

Contributor details
Your Expensify account email: <REPLACE EMAIL HERE>
Upwork Profile Link: <REPLACE LINK HERE>

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~022013065087772039537