Add bulk export to accounting integration by huult · Pull Request #83527 · Expensify/App

huult · 2026-02-26T04:06:19Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #79515
PROPOSAL: #79515 (comment)

Tests

Same QA step

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Precondition: The workspace is connected to an accounting integration (for example, QuickBooks Online).

Open the Expensify app.
Navigate to the workspace connected to the accounting integration.
Create two reports and approve both.
Go to the Reports page.
Bulk-select the two reports.
Click Export.
Verify the following options are visible:
QuickBooks Online
Mark as exported
Click QuickBooks Online.
After the export completes, open one of the exported reports.
Verify the message:
“Exported to QuickBooks Online and successfully created a record for out-of-pocket expenses.”
Go back to the Reports page.
Click QuickBooks Online again.
Verify that a modal appears stating the reports have already been exported to QuickBooks Online.
Click Mark as exported.
Verify that a modal appears stating the reports have already been exported to QuickBooks Online.
Open one of the exported reports.
Verify the message:
If exported via QuickBooks Online:
“Exported to QuickBooks Online and successfully created a record for out-of-pocket expenses.”
If marked via Mark as exported:
“Marked this report as manually exported to QuickBooks Online.”

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-02-18.at.15.07.19.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-02-18.at.15.08.52.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-02-18.at.14.53.45.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-02-18.at.15.03.47.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-02-18.at.15.09.55.mov

…ccounting-integrations Add bulk export to accounting integration

melvin-bot · 2026-02-26T04:06:55Z

@Valforte 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]

huult · 2026-02-26T04:08:14Z

cc @arosiclair @ahmedGaber93

huult · 2026-02-26T04:12:35Z

Screen.Recording.2026-02-26.at.11.09.48.mp4

@arosiclair @ahmedGaber93 I’ve fixed the deploy blocker issue. Could you please check again?

codecov · 2026-02-26T04:13:03Z

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/libs/DebugUtils.ts	`68.76% <ø> (ø)`
src/pages/inbox/report/ReportDetailsExportPage.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...onents/ReportActionItem/ExportWithDropdownMenu.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts	`66.78% <0.00%> (-0.24%)`	⬇️
src/libs/actions/Search.ts	`29.51% <0.00%> (-0.86%)`	⬇️
src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 10 files with indirect coverage changes

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 4f552e1598

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-02-26T04:17:04Z

src/pages/Search/SearchPage.tsx

+                    {
+                        text: connectionNameFriendly,
+                        icon: integrationIcon,
+                        onSelected: () => handleExportAction(() => exportToIntegrationOnSearch(hash, selectedReportIDs, connectedIntegration)),


Use all-matching query when bulk-exporting integration reports

In SearchPage this menu action exports with selectedReportIDs, so when the user has enabled “all matching items selected” it still sends only the currently loaded report IDs to exportToIntegrationOnSearch. That differs from the existing CSV/template export paths (which switch to query-based export in handleBasicExport/beginExportWithTemplate) and causes partial exports on paginated result sets while the UI implies all matches are selected.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@arosiclair @ahmedGaber93 Is this out of scope for this PR?

So with the current implementation, we're only exporting the page of reports that you can see? I think that's fine for now, but we'll probably want to improve that to do a full export as mentioned. cc @trjExpensify

trjExpensify · 2026-02-26T12:02:03Z

@ahmedGaber93 please jump on this!

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-02-26T15:57:16Z

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
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 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

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

20260308175546018.mp4

20260308175238372.mp4

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-02-26T16:13:10Z

Bug: The warning modal appears starting from the third time.

Steps to reproduce:

Admin stays on the Search page.
User submits an expense.
Admin approves and then exports it without opening the report page.

20260226180711810.mp4

@huult If you’re unable to reproduce the issue, try using a slow network connection. I believe this happens because we rely on the backend response when refetching the search API after exporting, while the export process has not yet completed on the backend.

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-02-26T16:16:41Z

@arosiclair Just to confirm: we will fix the regression for bulk exporting only, but we won’t address the existing issue on the Expense Report page in production, correct?

arosiclair · 2026-02-26T20:06:10Z

@arosiclair Just to confirm: we will fix the regression for bulk exporting only, but we won’t address the existing issue on the Expense Report page in production, correct?

If they both have the same root cause, let's fix both. Otherwise, just fixing the bulk export is fine.

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-02-26T20:09:20Z

Sounds good 👍

@huult Could you please handle the other case as well if it turns out to have the same root cause?

huult · 2026-02-27T07:23:16Z

#83476 The search bulk actions logic has been moved to a custom hook, so I need to update this accordingly.

…rt-accounting-integrations-version-2

huult · 2026-02-27T08:52:04Z

Screen.Recording.2026-02-27.at.15.49.16.mov

#83527 (comment) It's done

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-02-27T18:41:24Z

@huult I am still able to reproduce the issue with the same steps here #83527 (comment)

20260227203828451.mp4

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 34374acba6

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".

src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts

src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts

huult · 2026-03-10T05:17:42Z

@ahmedGaber93 it's done

huult · 2026-03-10T07:10:23Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: db6e1cdbe6

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-03-10T07:24:07Z

src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts

+                    exportOptions.push({
+                        text: translate('workspace.common.markAsExported'),
+                        icon: integrationIcon,
+                        onSelected: () => handleExportAction(() => markAsManuallyExported(selectedReportIDs, connectedIntegration)),


Update Export snapshot after bulk mark-as-exported

When bulk Mark as exported is triggered from Search, this path calls markAsManuallyExported(selectedReportIDs, connectedIntegration) without passing hash/currentSearchKey, so it cannot remove rows from ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.SNAPSHOT for the Export suggested search. In the EXPORT search context, users will see reports remain in the list until a refetch even though the action succeeded, unlike exportToIntegrationOnSearch which explicitly nulls snapshot entries for this case.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

This works as expected without the above change. I think it’s because we set isExportedToIntegration to true optimistically in this case.

I'm not sure why we made that change. In either case, should we pass the hash anyway?

We passed it to exportToIntegrationOnSearch to address this issue in the "Export" tab: #83527 (comment), but it hasn’t been fixed yet.

should we pass the hash anyway?

It works as expected with markAsManuallyExported, the item disappears immediately after being marked as exported. But can pass it to avoid unexpected issues.

20260310133123396.mp4

JmillsExpensify · 2026-03-10T07:54:18Z

We can merge as soon as C+ is able to do a final review.

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-10T11:30:01Z

NAB: Removing rows from the Export tab after exporting works, but there is a slight delay while waiting for the Pusher update that confirms the export success.

@huult Shouldn’t the last change fix it?

20260310132550975.mp4

huult · 2026-03-10T14:38:26Z

@huult Shouldn’t the last change fix it?

I think yes, because the previous function didn’t need it

…rt-accounting-integrations-version-2

arosiclair · 2026-03-11T14:36:57Z

src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts

-                pendingFields: {
-                    export: CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.ADD,
-                },
+                isExportedToIntegration: true,


Why are we not using pendingFields in this case anymore?

@arosiclair We’re discussing this here: #83527 (comment), but no final decision has been made yet. WDYT?

Using pendingFields here makes most sense to me

@arosiclair it's done

arosiclair · 2026-03-11T14:37:27Z

src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts

+                    exportOptions.push({
+                        text: translate('workspace.common.markAsExported'),
+                        icon: integrationIcon,
+                        onSelected: () => handleExportAction(() => markAsManuallyExported(selectedReportIDs, connectedIntegration)),


I'm not sure why we made that change. In either case, should we pass the hash anyway?

trjExpensify · 2026-03-11T22:49:08Z

@huult please keep on top of the comments and let's get this one over the line. Thanks!

…rt-accounting-integrations-version-2

huult · 2026-03-12T01:31:07Z

I'm not sure why we made that change. In either case, should we pass the hash anyway?

@arosiclair For a single “mark as exported”, we don’t need a hash. For multiple “mark as exported”, we don’t need a hash either, I think.

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-12T01:43:59Z

@huult any update on this #83527 (comment)?

huult · 2026-03-12T01:54:30Z

NAB: Removing rows from the Export tab after exporting works, but there is a slight delay while waiting for the Pusher update that confirms the export success.

@huult Shouldn’t the last change fix it?

20260310132550975.mp4

@ahmedGaber93 I think this is currently a product issue. If you use the export button, the same issue still occurs, right?

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-12T02:04:37Z

@huult Yes, it reproduces on production. I just want to confirm that this is not related to BE changes that send back isExportedToIntegration via Pusher data. I think the item should be removed from the list before the FE receives the Pusher data, so I agree with you that this is not a regression from the PR. maybe the behavior is changed by BE changes, but both looks not the best UX

The previous behavior on production, before the BE change, was to keep the item in the list and not remove it.

After the BE change, it is now removed once the Pusher data is received.

I think The correct behavior should be removing the item immediately once the request is sent.

@trjExpensify @arosiclair If this is considered an issue, we can handle it separately in a new issue. video here #83527 (comment)

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-12T02:14:38Z

@arosiclair LGTM! All yours!

heyjennahay

Product change LGTM

github-actions · 2026-03-12T19:48:52Z

🚧 @arosiclair has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2026-03-12T19:54:15Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #83527.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-0fc2745-fda79d3-c5a61c9e34c7159e233bbaf3fdc066fd347507e3/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-0fc2745-fda79d3-183a6d3a16b3ac0bcb4c000e6d76ad130e1d3544/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://83527.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-03-12T23:17:29Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/arosiclair in version: 9.3.37-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-03-16T10:05:55Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.3.37-10 🚀

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

arosiclair and others added 2 commits February 26, 2026 10:53

Merge pull request Expensify#81421 from huult/79515-add-bulk-export-a…

842de76

…ccounting-integrations Add bulk export to accounting integration

Fix retrieving report from snapshot

4f552e1

huult requested review from a team as code owners February 26, 2026 04:06

melvin-bot bot assigned huult Feb 26, 2026

melvin-bot bot requested review from Valforte and heyjennahay and removed request for a team February 26, 2026 04:06

huult changed the title ~~Merge pull request #81421 from huult/79515-add-bulk-export-accounting…~~ Add bulk export to accounting integration Feb 26, 2026

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Feb 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

trjExpensify requested review from ahmedGaber93 and arosiclair and removed request for Valforte February 26, 2026 12:02

huult added 3 commits February 27, 2026 14:24

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into 79515-add-bulk-expo…

d842432

…rt-accounting-integrations-version-2

Add bulk export to accounting integration to custom hook

3aa7118

Do not wait for search API

d9a7a40

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Mar 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

restore previous export flag

db6e1cd

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Mar 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

huult added 2 commits March 10, 2026 23:43

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into 79515-add-bulk-expo…

899d70b

…rt-accounting-integrations-version-2

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into 79515-add-bulk-expo…

b0038f0

…rt-accounting-integrations-version-2

arosiclair reviewed Mar 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

huult added 2 commits March 12, 2026 08:25

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into 79515-add-bulk-expo…

00a2d5c

…rt-accounting-integrations-version-2

add pending Fields

034a7d8

heyjennahay approved these changes Mar 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

arosiclair approved these changes Mar 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

arosiclair merged commit 0fc2745 into Expensify:main Mar 12, 2026
33 checks passed

This was referenced Mar 12, 2026

Investigate workflow job failing on main: test / test (job 6) #85130

Closed

Investigate workflow job failing on main: test / test (job 8) #85131

Closed

Investigate workflow job failing on main: test / test (job 6) #85133

Closed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Mar 12, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-03-12 #85146

Closed

87 tasks

Conversation

huult commented Feb 26, 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!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Feb 26, 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!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Feb 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

trjExpensify commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Feb 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

arosiclair commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Feb 27, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Feb 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Feb 27, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

huult commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Mar 10, 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 Mar 10, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JmillsExpensify commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Mar 10, 2026

huult commented Feb 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Feb 26, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

ahmedGaber93 commented Feb 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading

huult commented Feb 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

huult commented Mar 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

ahmedGaber93 commented Mar 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading