Fix time expense confirm page back button navigation when submitting from report details RHP #79673

mhawryluk · 2026-01-15T13:20:34Z

Explanation of Change

Makes it so that the RHP back button correctly navigates back to the participant page, instead of to the "create expense" RHP, when submitting a time expense from report details RHP.

Fixed Issues

$ #79578
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

Go to workspace chat of a workspace that has time tracking enabled in Old Dot.
Click + > Create expense > Time.
Create a time expense.
Open the time expense.
Click Report > Remove from report.
Go to self DM.
Open the unreported time expense.
Click on the report header.
Click Submit it to someone.
Select workspace chat.
On confirm page, click RHP back button.
Verify you are on the participant selection page.
Go to workspace chat again.
Click + > Create expense > Time.
Enter hour count and click next.
In the confirmation page click RHP back button.
Verify you are on the "Create expense" RHP and the "Time" tab.

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as tests.

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.16.Pro.Max.-.2026-01-15.at.14.28.16.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Nagranie.z.ekranu.2026-01-15.o.14.23.22.mov

…from report details RHP

codecov · 2026-01-15T13:31:35Z

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
...es/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx	`56.05% <ø> (+0.22%)`	⬆️
src/libs/IOUUtils.ts	`70.13% <0.00%> (-1.50%)`	⬇️
... and 115 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-01-15T13:49:54Z

@DylanDylann 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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b30bd30280

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-01-15T14:04:28Z

src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx

        }
        if (isTimeRequest) {
+            if (isMovingTransactionFromTrackExpense) {
+                return Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.MONEY_REQUEST_STEP_PARTICIPANTS.getRoute(iouType, initialTransactionID, transaction?.reportID ?? reportID, undefined, action), {


Fall back when reportID is unreported

When submitting a tracked time expense that skips the participants step (e.g. preferred-policy auto‑assignment), the draft transaction can still have reportID set to UNREPORTED_REPORT_ID ('0'), because the auto‑assignment path only sets participants. With transaction?.reportID ?? reportID, the back button will pop to a participants route built with reportID 0 instead of the confirmation route’s reportID, which resets the selected workspace/participants and shows the wrong report. Consider explicitly falling back when the transaction reportID is unreported (or just use the route reportID).

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

joekaufmanexpensify

Fix makes sense 👍

DylanDylann · 2026-01-16T09:30:30Z

src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx

        if (isTimeRequest) {
+            if (isMovingTransactionFromTrackExpense) {
+                return Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.MONEY_REQUEST_STEP_PARTICIPANTS.getRoute(iouType, initialTransactionID, transaction?.reportID ?? reportID, undefined, action), {


@mhawryluk I think the problem is caused by this block: if (isTimeRequest). Why do we need it? It could also cause the same issue in the future when creating time expenses via global create

I think you're right. I removed this block and updated the navigateToStartMoneyRequestStep function to support time and it works perfectly for when creating a request. however when submitting an expense from report details RHP, when we refresh the page and then click the back button the RHP is dismissed instead of navigating back to the participant page. but I think that's how it works for every other request type, so it's probably okay, right?

…onfirmation page

DylanDylann · 2026-01-16T16:19:50Z

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

Screen.Recording.2026-01-16.at.23.18.34.mov

DylanDylann · 2026-01-20T10:32:21Z

@grgia Kindly bump

OSBotify · 2026-01-20T17:43:20Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.3.5-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-01-21T23:07:49Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.3.5-7 🚀

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

Fix time expense confirm page back button navigation when submitting …

b30bd30

…from report details RHP

melvin-bot bot assigned mhawryluk Jan 15, 2026

mhawryluk marked this pull request as ready for review January 15, 2026 13:49

mhawryluk requested review from a team as code owners January 15, 2026 13:49

melvin-bot bot requested review from a team, DylanDylann and trjExpensify and removed request for a team January 15, 2026 13:49

melvin-bot bot requested review from joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team January 15, 2026 13:49

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Jan 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

joekaufmanexpensify removed the request for review from trjExpensify January 15, 2026 18:23

joekaufmanexpensify previously approved these changes Jan 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

DylanDylann reviewed Jan 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Remove checking if transaction is a time request in navigateBack in c…

e445386

…onfirmation page

mhawryluk dismissed joekaufmanexpensify’s stale review via e445386 January 16, 2026 10:33

DylanDylann approved these changes Jan 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from grgia January 16, 2026 16:20

grgia approved these changes Jan 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

grgia merged commit 4b6b798 into Expensify:main Jan 20, 2026
30 of 33 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jan 20, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-01-20 #80009

Closed

85 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix time expense confirm page back button navigation when submitting from report details RHP #79673

Fix time expense confirm page back button navigation when submitting from report details RHP #79673

Uh oh!

mhawryluk commented Jan 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 15, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 15, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Jan 15, 2026

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify left a comment

Uh oh!

DylanDylann Jan 16, 2026

Uh oh!

mhawryluk Jan 16, 2026

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Jan 16, 2026

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Jan 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 20, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Fix time expense confirm page back button navigation when submitting from report details RHP #79673

Fix time expense confirm page back button navigation when submitting from report details RHP #79673

Uh oh!

Conversation

mhawryluk commented Jan 15, 2026 • 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 Jan 15, 2026 • 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 Jan 15, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Jan 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DylanDylann Jan 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mhawryluk Jan 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Jan 16, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Jan 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 20, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

mhawryluk commented Jan 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 15, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading