Re-enable duplicate expenses with fixed blockers

[jjcoffee]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #65948
$ #77303
$ #77293
$ #77289
$ #77326
$ #77352
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

Same as QA steps.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as QA steps.

QA Steps

1. Sign in with a new account
2. Complete onboarding with Track and budget expenses and without creating a workspace
3. Create an expense to any user
4. Add some markdown to the description (e.g. google.com)
5. Open the expense and go to More -> Duplicate
6. Verify that a self-DM is created, with the expense duplicated to it
7. Verify that the duplicated expense contains the same markdown text in the description
8. Create a workspace
9. Add an expense
10. Open the expense and go to More -> Duplicate
11. Verify that the menu closes immediately, followed by navigation to the transactions list (note that for now the text and icon do not change through the cycle, Duplicate->Duplicated->Duplicate, for single transactions)
12. Split the expense
13. Open one of the splits and go to More -> Duplicate
14. Tap Amount and verify that only two splits show up
15. Go to the transaction list, select all and delete them
16. Verify that all expenses are deleted successfully, with no backend errors showing up.

• 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
• 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 new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• 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-app-2025-12-11_17.26.54.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android-chrome-2025-12-11_17.34.56.mp4

iOS: Native

ios-app-2025-12-11_16.55.30.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-safari-2025-12-11_17.15.18.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

desktop-chrome-2025-12-11_16.39.25.mp4

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts	92.63% <100.00%> (+0.50%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU.ts	65.01% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
src/components/PopoverMenu.tsx	78.91% <57.14%> (-0.43%)	⬇️
... and 17 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav 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]

[melvin-bot]

@FitseTLT @marcochavezf One of you needs to 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]

[FitseTLT]

So @jjcoffee Are we really solving this here? I don't see the changes.

[jjcoffee]

@FitseTLT Yes, fixed in this commit 02d3a2e

[FitseTLT]

Oh ok my bad 🙏

[jjcoffee]

No worries, it's not super intuitive without context 😄

[hoangzinh]

LGTM

[JS00001]

@jjcoffee Could you please fix the reactcompiler issues?

src/components/PopoverMenu.tsx:429:43
Found a manual memoization usage of useCallback. Newly added React component files must not contain any manual memoization and instead be auto-memoized by React Compiler. Remove useCallback or disable automatic memoization by adding the "use no memo"; directive at the beginning of the component and give a reason why automatic memoization is not applicable.
src/components/PopoverMenu.tsx:491:32
Found a manual memoization usage of useMemo. Newly added React component files must not contain any manual memoization and instead be auto-memoized by React Compiler. Remove useMemo or disable automatic memoization by adding the "use no memo"; directive at the beginning of the component and give a reason why automatic memoization is not applicable.
src/components/PopoverMenu.tsx:520:37
Found a manual memoization usage of useMemo. Newly added React component files must not contain any manual memoization and instead be auto-memoized by React Compiler. Remove useMemo or disable automatic memoization by adding the "use no memo"; directive at the beginning of the component and give a reason why automatic memoization is not applicable.
src/components/PopoverMenu.tsx:586:16
Found a manual memoization usage of memo. Newly added React component files must not contain any manual memoization and instead be auto-memoized by React Compiler. Remove memo or disable automatic memoization by adding the "use no memo"; directive at the beginning of the component and give a reason why automatic memoization is not applicable.

[jjcoffee]

@JS00001 They're unrelated to my change as far as I can tell. @chrispader can we ignore the errors here?

[JS00001]

Hmm interesting, lets see what happens here: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1765990481186459

[jjcoffee]

@JS00001 Looks like they're leaning towards rolling back enforcement (see this). I'm not sure if we need to wait for them to merge a new PR to change the check behaviour.

[JS00001]

@jjcoffee We'd like to get this in, so I'm going to merge through the errors, since they were not added by you

[melvin-bot]

@JS00001 looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

[JS00001]

Merged through failures per #77343 (comment)

@jjcoffee Could we get started on the per-diem and distance duplication issues?

Similarly, if there are BE issues, could you please LMK and send them in the format of

## Action Performed:
Break down in numbered steps

## Expected Result:
Describe what you think the backend _SHOULD_ have done

## Actual Result:
Describe what the backend _ACTUALLY_ did

[OSBotify]

✋ 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]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.2.82-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.2.82-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.2.82-0 🚀

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

[IuliiaHerets]

@jjcoffee QA team failed this PR with original issue

1766110418460.065d3c7e-b26a-40af-a879-d724ac43e537.mp4

[jjcoffee]

@IuliiaHerets Commented on the issue here. This is expected behaviour for now. It's my bad - I should've made the test steps clearer. Basically we're only closing it immediately if the screen is going to navigate away and still display the menu (which led to #77289).

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.2.84-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/AndrewGable in version: 9.2.84-8 🚀

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