added the logic for TO field calculation if the report contains more than one to and from expenses, and if someone pays directly to the user by Burhan-Rashid · Pull Request #74690 · Expensify/App

Burhan-Rashid · 2025-11-10T11:06:13Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$#73958
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Prerequistes:
User A and current user(User B)

Case 1:

User A requested $14 from user B.
User B requested $4 from user A. (Both the transactions become part of the same report.)
Go to reports screen > Expenses.
Verify that To field is showing the correct user for both the transactions.

Case 2:

User A directly paid $50 to user B.
Go to reports screen > Expenses.
Verify that To field is showing the correct user for this transaction.

In General verify that To field is showing correct User for all the transactions.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."
Same as tests.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

tofielddemo.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

…than one to/from expenses, and if someone pays directly to the user

codecov · 2025-11-10T11:17:56Z

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts	`69.56% <88.88%> (+56.68%)`	⬆️
... and 175 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2025-11-10T11:55:31Z

@suneox 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]

s77rt · 2025-11-10T14:24:47Z

src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts

+    const moneyRequestReportActionID = transactionItem.moneyRequestReportActionID;
+    if (moneyRequestReportActionID) {
+        const reportActions = data[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT_ACTIONS}${transactionItem.reportID}`];
+        const reportAction = reportActions[moneyRequestReportActionID];


NAB. Can we pass reportAction directly instead of data? (it's available already). This would avoid use of moneyRequestReportActionID which is going to be removed

sure, done 👍

suneox · 2025-11-10T19:05:41Z

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 that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
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 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.ts 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.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-11-11.at.01.34.11.mp4

Screen.Recording.2025-11-11.at.01.30.36.mp4

Screen.Recording.2025-11-11.at.02.10.02.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

Simulator Screenshot - iPhone 14 Pro - 2025-11-11 at 01 48 55

iOS: mWeb Safari

Simulator Screenshot - iPhone 14 Pro - 2025-11-11 at 01 47 32

heyjennahay · 2025-11-10T19:32:34Z

Not a product change, removing myself and unsubscribing

Burhan-Rashid · 2025-11-10T19:37:00Z

@suneox while working on another PR, i found that we needed the same changes here as well:

App/src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts

Lines 2370 to 2374 in 3cb2fe3

    
           const report = (data as OnyxTypes.SearchResults['data'])[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${transaction.reportID}`]; 
        
           const managerID = report?.managerID; 
        
           if (managerID && managerID !== currentAccountID && !columns[CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_LIST.COLUMNS.TO]) { 
        
               columns[CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_LIST.COLUMNS.TO] = !!report && !isOpenReport(report); 
        
           }

So i have added one more commit. It won't cause affect any of the changes that you had reviewed earlier.
Sorry for the inconvenience.

luacmartins

Left a few minor comments

luacmartins · 2025-11-10T19:42:47Z

src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts

+ * Calculates the "to" field value for a given transaction item based on the associated report and search data.
+ */
+function getToFieldValueForTransaction(
+    transactionItem: SearchTransaction,


We're deprecating SearchTransaction, can we use src/types/onyx/Transaction` instead?

luacmartins · 2025-11-10T19:43:09Z

src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts

+    report: OnyxTypes.Report,
+    personalDetailsList: OnyxTypes.PersonalDetailsList,
+    reportAction: OnyxTypes.ReportAction | undefined,
+): SearchPersonalDetails {


Same here, we're deprecating SearchPersonalDetails, can we use OnyxTypes.PersonalDetailsList please

luacmartins · 2025-11-10T19:44:32Z

src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts

+        }
+    }
+
+    const isIOUReport = report?.type === CONST.REPORT.TYPE.IOU;


We can move this variable delcaration inside the if conditional, since it's only used there

done resolved all the comments. 👍

suneox · 2025-11-11T14:05:49Z

@suneox while working on another PR, i found that we needed the same changes here as well:

App/src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts

Lines 2370 to 2374 in 3cb2fe3

const report = (data as OnyxTypes.SearchResults['data'])[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${transaction.reportID}`];

const managerID = report?.managerID;

if (managerID && managerID !== currentAccountID && !columns[CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_LIST.COLUMNS.TO]) {

columns[CONST.REPORT.TRANSACTION_LIST.COLUMNS.TO] = !!report && !isOpenReport(report);

}

So i have added one more commit. It won't cause affect any of the changes that you had reviewed earlier.
Sorry for the inconvenience.

The updated logic still LGTM — the only remaining issue is the typecheck failure, and then we can go ahead with this one.

Burhan-Rashid · 2025-11-11T14:29:21Z

The TS error is currently on latest main and all the PR's are facing this issue. Once the issue is resolved, i will merge the latest main changes. Thanks for the review @suneox

Burhan-Rashid · 2025-11-11T16:21:52Z

The TS error got fixed in latest main. updated the branch with latest main. @suneox

luacmartins

LGTM

OSBotify · 2025-11-11T18:09:27Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

OSBotify · 2025-11-12T16:09:18Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.2.55-3 🚀

platform	result
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

OSBotify · 2025-11-13T01:21:51Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.2.57-0 🚀

platform	result
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

OSBotify · 2025-11-13T17:14:37Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.2.57-4 🚀

platform	result
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌

added the logic for TO field calculation if the report contains more …

d445021

…than one to/from expenses, and if someone pays directly to the user

melvin-bot bot assigned Burhan-Rashid Nov 10, 2025

Burhan-Rashid added 2 commits November 10, 2025 17:05

fixed tests

9b82fbe

added comments

e3c9b99

Burhan-Rashid marked this pull request as ready for review November 10, 2025 11:55

Burhan-Rashid requested review from a team as code owners November 10, 2025 11:55

melvin-bot bot requested review from heyjennahay and suneox and removed request for a team November 10, 2025 11:55

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team November 10, 2025 11:55

Burhan-Rashid mentioned this pull request Nov 10, 2025

refactor: remove managerID from SearchTransaction and use managerID of report instead of that #74422

Merged

54 tasks

s77rt reviewed Nov 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

fixed PR comments

1c598ed

luacmartins self-requested a review November 10, 2025 17:43

heyjennahay removed their request for review November 10, 2025 19:32

added the changes for the column config as well

77e298e

luacmartins requested changes Nov 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

Burhan-Rashid added 2 commits November 11, 2025 12:40

fixed pr comments and failing tests

abbc3d0

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into fix/73958_new

6a9bcbb

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into fix/73958_new

034edd2

suneox approved these changes Nov 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from luacmartins November 11, 2025 17:04

luacmartins approved these changes Nov 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

luacmartins merged commit 29208b3 into Expensify:main Nov 11, 2025
26 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Nov 12, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-11-12 #74958

Closed

67 tasks

nlemma mentioned this pull request Nov 13, 2025

[HOLD 73983][$250] Incorrect From/To filtering for IOU expenses (both directions) #75061

Closed

8 tasks

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Nov 13, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-11-20] [$125] [To-do counters] SearchTransaction > managerID #73958

Closed

nlemma mentioned this pull request Nov 14, 2025

“To” column disappears depending on amount of expense sent back #75126

Closed

8 tasks

Burhan-Rashid mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2026

Expense-When User A sends a manual and scan expense to User B, IOU avatar is combined #82488

Open

7 tasks

Conversation

Burhan-Rashid commented Nov 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Nov 10, 2025 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 10, 2025

Uh oh!

s77rt Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Burhan-Rashid Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

suneox commented Nov 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

heyjennahay commented Nov 10, 2025

Uh oh!

Burhan-Rashid commented Nov 10, 2025

Uh oh!

luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

luacmartins Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

luacmartins Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

luacmartins Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Burhan-Rashid Nov 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

suneox commented Nov 11, 2025

Uh oh!

Burhan-Rashid commented Nov 11, 2025

Uh oh!

Burhan-Rashid commented Nov 11, 2025

Uh oh!

luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Nov 11, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Nov 12, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Nov 13, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Nov 13, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

Burhan-Rashid commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

suneox commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading