filtered personal chats out of list when submitting expense with coprate card

[mukhrr]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #66902
PROPOSAL: #66902 (comment)

Tests

The same with QA step.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

1. Create an expense with company card
2. Create a new report
3. Move card expense to newly created report
4. Create a manual expense in the new report
5. Delete the report
6. Go to your personal space
7. Find the corporate expense you created in 1st step and click on it
8. Click on header title on expense, i.e, "$*** for something" text
9. Click "Submit it to someone"
10. Verify you see only workspace chats, not one personal chat in list

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot]

@Pujan92 Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[trjExpensify]

Why doesn't Delete show here on this report that has one company card transaction and one cash expense? 🤔

[Pujan92]

@trjExpensify do we need to allow user to delete the report when there is/are card transactions in it? Currently, for single card transaction expense report we are not showing the delete option so I thought user can't delete the report when there is any card transaction with corporate liability. comment

[trjExpensify]

Right, there shouldn't be a restriction on deleting an expense report. There should be a restriction on deleting a corp card liability expense.

Currently, for single card transaction expense report we are not showing the delete option

The reason for this restriction is because deleting a "one expense report" is effectively deleting the expense.

[mukhrr]

@Pujan92 @trjExpensify so we are back to my first solution here #66902 (comment) ?!

[trjExpensify]

The isDeleteAction function in ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts had different logic for IOU reports vs expense reports. Expense reports properly checked for card transactions with corporate liability (CONST.TRANSACTION.LIABILITY_TYPE.RESTRICT) and prevented deletion, but IOU reports only checked basic conditions (single transaction, owner, open/processing status) without considering the liability type restriction.

Interestingly, my first question is why and how can a managed corporate card transaction make its way onto an IOUReport? 🤔

[mountiny]

Yeah, that's my same initial thought, it does not sound like a problem to me since you cannot have a card transaction on iou report

[mukhrr]

@trjExpensify @mountiny pls, check out the video and QA steps here. They moved expense to the iou report

[Pujan92]

Once the user deletes the report, card transactions are moved to the personal space as unreported transactions. From there it is transferred to iou report. Based on that, I thought we should not allow users to delete that report.

[mountiny]

Hmm I think you can delete the report, but you should not be able to move card transaction to IOU report 🤔 at least not now

[trjExpensify]

Hmm I think you can delete the report, but you should not be able to move card transaction to IOU report 🤔 at least not now

Haha, track flow strikes again! 😅 Agreed, I think the fix here should be to only show a list of workspaces in that "Submit it to someone" page for a corp card transaction unreported in the selfDM, to prevent corp card transactions going onto IOU Reports.

[Pujan92]

now BE seems to be responding with an error to avoid this company card transaction to iou request. Testing team informed that the issue is not reproducible now #66902 (comment)

[mukhrr]

@Pujan92 now I'm working on filtering out workspaces list on "Submit to someone" page when it's card transaction. Should I continue?!

[Pujan92]

Wait for some time, let's @trjExpensify and @mountiny confirm the final expected behaviour, whether we need to filter and show a list of workspaces only in that "Submit it to someone" page for a corp card transaction unreported in the selfDM?

[trjExpensify]

now BE seems to be responding with an error to avoid this company card transaction to iou request.

Great! Glad the BE is now preventing it.

whether we need to filter and show a list of workspaces only in that "Submit it to someone" page for a corp card transaction unreported in the selfDM?

Yes, let's do this please!

[mukhrr]

@Pujan92 I have updated PR based on the latest discussions.
And it is ready to review.

[Pujan92]

Reviewer Checklist

• I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
• I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
  • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
  • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
  • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
• I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: HybridApp
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: HybridApp
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
• I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
  • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
  • The file is named correctly
  • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
  • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
  • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
  • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
  • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
  • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-09-25.at.11.58.36.mov

MacOS: Desktop

[Pujan92]

@mukhrr Your changes look good.

Bug: Once the card expense gets unreported after deleting the expense report, it starts showing the delete option in the secondary actions menu(it is bcoz below condition gets true). Also, it shows when that unreported transaction moved to any other workspace. It is not from your changes but we need to fix it by not showing delete option there. While checking, it seems the liabilityType is missing from transaction?.comment. Could you plz check that

App/src/libs/ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts

Lines 460 to 462 in f3c247f

	if (isUnreported) {
	return isOwner;
	}

Screen.Recording.2025-09-11.at.00.29.32.mov

[mukhrr]

@trjExpensify yesss! So let's move forward with this PR as the issue on Unreporting is related to BE as I mentioned here cc @Pujan92

[Pujan92]

@mukhrr Plz merge main and resolve conflicts. In this PR I think we only need to filter out personal chats in the list.

Hiding the delete option for card transaction will be covered in PR #71037

[mukhrr]

@Pujan92 it's ready!

[Pujan92]

Minor revert changes @mukhrr

[trjExpensify]

@trjExpensify yesss! So let's move forward with this PR as the issue on Unreporting is related to BE as I mentioned #69815 (comment)

Just to confirm.. with this PR:

• users will be able to delete (eligible) reports that contain corp card expenses just fine, and we'll unreport the expenses if they do
• users will be able to move those unreported corp card transactions to reports on workspaces just fine, we won't let them move them to IOUReports

Is that right?

[mukhrr]

@trjExpensify yes, that's correct.

[mukhrr]

@Pujan92 done✅

[Pujan92]

LGTM!

Screen.Recording.2025-09-25.at.11.58.36.mov

[inimaga]

@mukhrr On of your commits (f90551c) is unsigned. Could you remedy before we proceed with merge?

[mukhrr]

@inimaga hmm I see.. how to sign it?

[Pujan92]

I wonder how that middle commit is unsigned 🤔

To sign, I found the following steps from ChatGPT.

To sign an existing commit in Git that wasn't signed, you can amend the commit and re-sign it. Here's how you can do it:

If you want to sign a previous commit (for example, a commit that's not the most recent), you can do the following:

Step-by-step:

1. Find the commit hash:
   To find the commit that you want to sign, use git log to list your recent commits:

   git log

   Note the hash (e.g., abc123) of the commit you want to amend.

2. Rebase to the commit you want to change:
   Start an interactive rebase to the commit before the one you want to change:

   git rebase -i <commit-hash>^

   The ^ symbol includes the commit you want to edit.

3. Mark the commit to be edited:
   In the text editor that opens, change the word pick to edit next to the commit you want to amend, then save and close the editor.

4. Sign the commit:
   Git will pause on that commit. You can amend the commit with the following command:

   git commit --amend --no-edit --gpg-sign=<your-gpg-key-id>

   Replace <your-gpg-key-id> with the actual key ID from the output of gpg --list-secret-keys.

5. Continue the rebase:
   After amending the commit, continue the rebase process:

   git rebase --continue

6. Force push the changes:
   After the rebase finishes, you'll need to force-push the changes to your remote branch:

   git push --force

[github-actions]

⚠️ This PR is possibly changing native code and/or updating libraries, it may cause problems with HybridApp. Please check if any patch updates are required in the HybridApp repo and run an AdHoc build to verify that HybridApp will not break. Ask Contributor Plus for help if you are not sure how to handle this. ⚠️

The merge-base changed after approval.

[mukhrr]

hmm it's taking more time than expected. Can close this one and open new PR with the changes (refrencing this original PR if necessary)?!
cc @Pujan92 @inimaga

[Pujan92]

Yes @mukhrr, Let's open a new PR.

[mukhrr]

Closing this as we moved the whole PR into #71363

cc @Pujan92 @inimaga