Fix invoice amount showing minus sign when edited offline by MelvinBot · Pull Request #84048 · Expensify/App

MelvinBot · 2026-03-03T16:03:52Z

Explanation of Change

When editing an invoice amount while offline, the chat view incorrectly displays a "-" (minus) sign before the amount. This happens because of a sign convention mismatch between how the edited amount is stored and how it's read for display.

Invoice transactions store amounts as negative values (same as expense reports). However, getUpdateMoneyRequestParams and calculateDiffAmount only checked isExpenseReport(iouReport) to decide whether to negate the amount — which returns false for invoices (since invoices have type 'invoice', not 'expense'). This caused modifiedAmount to be stored as positive. When the display path reads the amount, it uses a broader check that includes isPaidGroupPolicy(policy) (true for Team/Corporate workspaces), which then negates the positive modifiedAmount, producing a minus sign.

The fix adds || isInvoiceReportReportUtils(iouReport) to both isFromExpenseReport checks, matching the existing pattern already used at line 4672 for the report total calculation.

Fixed Issues

$ #83546
PROPOSAL: #83546 (comment)

Tests

Enable invoices in a workspace (Team or Corporate plan)
Send a few invoices in a room
Disable internet connection (go offline)
Go to the invoice room
Edit an invoice amount (e.g., change from $100 to $150)
Save the edit
Observe the chat view — verify the invoice amount does NOT show a "-" sign
Verify the amount displays correctly (e.g., "$150.00", not "-$150.00")

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Disable internet connection
Navigate to an invoice room with existing invoices
Edit an invoice > edit amount > save
Verify the updated amount in the chat view does NOT have a minus sign
Re-enable internet connection
Verify the amount syncs correctly and still displays without a minus sign

QA Steps

Log in to staging with an account that has invoices enabled in a workspace
Send a few invoices in a room
Disable internet connection
Go to the invoice room
Edit an invoice amount and save
Verify the invoice amount in chat view does NOT show a "-" sign
Re-enable internet and verify the amount remains correct

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

…seReport during amount edit Invoice transactions store amounts as negative (like expense reports), but getUpdateMoneyRequestParams and calculateDiffAmount only checked isExpenseReport(), which returns false for invoices. This caused modifiedAmount to be stored as positive, while the display path (which uses isPaidGroupPolicy) negated it, showing a minus sign. Co-authored-by: ahmedGaber93 <ahmedGaber93@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-03-03T16:04:07Z

I created this PR from an upstream branch since I don't have push access to your fork.

To take ownership of this branch and be able to push updates, run:

git remote add upstream https://github.com/Expensify/App.git
git fetch upstream claude-fixInvoiceEditOfflineMinusSign
git checkout -b claude-fixInvoiceEditOfflineMinusSign upstream/claude-fixInvoiceEditOfflineMinusSign
git push -u origin claude-fixInvoiceEditOfflineMinusSign

Then you can close this PR and open a new one from your fork.

codecov · 2026-03-03T16:12:42Z

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/actions/IOU/index.ts	`72.47% <100.00%> (-0.02%)`	⬇️
... and 165 files with indirect coverage changes

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-03T18:56:54Z

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

Invoice

20260303204100499.mp4

Expense Report with one transaction

20260303204231701.mp4

Expense Report with two transaction

20260303204426682.mp4

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-03T19:03:37Z

@MelvinBot mark it as "Ready for review"

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-03T19:09:53Z

@MelvinBot please mark this PR as ready for review

MelvinBot · 2026-03-03T19:53:24Z

PR has been marked as Ready for review as requested.

melvin-bot · 2026-03-03T19:53:26Z

@ahmedGaber93 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]

MelvinBot · 2026-03-03T19:58:06Z

This PR is already marked as Ready for review — no changes needed.

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 8ad07ecd32

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 · 2026-03-03T20:04:45Z

src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

        return 0;
    }
-    const isExpenseReportLocal = isExpenseReport(iouReport);
+    const isExpenseReportLocal = isExpenseReport(iouReport) || isInvoiceReportReportUtils(iouReport);


Handle legacy positive modifiedAmount before diffing invoices

This now treats every invoice as an expense-sign transaction during calculateDiffAmount, which breaks the offline re-edit flow for invoices already edited on older builds (where modifiedAmount was saved as positive, per this bug’s root cause). In that case getAmount(transaction, true) returns a negative current amount while the report total is still based on the prior positive interpretation, so a second offline amount edit computes an inflated diff and temporarily drives the optimistic invoice total to the wrong value until server sync. Please normalize legacy invoice amounts (or guard this branch) before computing the diff.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

I think we don’t need to handle any legacy cases here.

The old modifiedAmount values with the incorrect positive sign will be overridden with the correct value once the app comes back online and syncs with the server.

melvin-bot · 2026-03-03T21:51:24Z

We did not find an internal engineer to review this PR, trying to assign a random engineer to #83546 as well as to this PR... Please reach out for help on Slack if no one gets assigned!

Beamanator · 2026-03-04T12:53:49Z

I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.

@ahmedGaber93 let's ask Melvin to write tests for this fix 🙏

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-04T14:11:54Z

@MelvinBot add unit tests for this fix.

Co-authored-by: ahmedGaber93 <ahmedGaber93@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-03-04T14:19:10Z

Added unit tests for calculateDiffAmount with invoice reports. The new tests mirror the existing expense report tests but use CONST.REPORT.TYPE.INVOICE to verify that:

Returns 0 when currency and amount are the same for an invoice report
Returns the correct diff (-100) when amounts differ — same sign convention as expense reports
Returns null when currencies differ for an invoice report

These tests ensure that the fix (treating invoice reports like expense reports for amount sign convention) is covered by automated tests.

melvin-bot · 2026-03-04T14:19:11Z

@ahmedGaber93 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]

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-04T15:16:03Z

@MelvinBot please add a test for getUpdatedTransaction to verify that modifiedAmount is negated when isFromExpenseReport is true.

Verify that modifiedAmount is negated when isFromExpenseReport is true and left positive when isFromExpenseReport is false. Co-authored-by: ahmedGaber93 <ahmedGaber93@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-03-04T15:23:33Z

Added two tests for getUpdatedTransaction in tests/unit/TransactionUtilsTest.ts:

should negate modifiedAmount when isFromExpenseReport is true — verifies that when isFromExpenseReport is true, the modifiedAmount is stored as the negated value (e.g., amount 500 → modifiedAmount -500).
should not negate modifiedAmount when isFromExpenseReport is false — verifies that when isFromExpenseReport is false, the modifiedAmount is stored as-is (e.g., amount 500 → modifiedAmount 500).

MelvinBot · 2026-03-04T15:26:27Z

The failing CLA / CLA check is not related to this PR's changes — it's a transient GitHub Actions infrastructure error. The runner failed to download the CLA action due to an SSL connection failure:

Failed to download action 'contributor-assistant/github-action'. Error: Error while copying content to a stream.
The SSL connection could not be established, see inner exception.

To fix: Re-run the failed CLA job from the Actions tab. No code changes are needed.

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-03-04T16:47:48Z

@Beamanator All yours!

Beamanator

Looking great!

github-actions · 2026-03-04T21:00:56Z

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

github-actions · 2026-03-04T21:05:55Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #84048.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-836a937-9a9d226-1f8b3c2169c4e39fc31f78704a03127a9c370fa8/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-836a937-9a9d226-2961bf44343999f317e9360d271549983dc859af/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://84048.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-03-04T21:08:49Z

✋ 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 · 2026-03-06T04:16:03Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.3.32-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-03-06T22:45:16Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.3.32-3 🚀

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

MelvinBot assigned ahmedGaber93 Mar 3, 2026

MelvinBot requested a review from a team March 3, 2026 16:03

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Mar 3, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-03-13] [$250] Invoices - Editing amount in offline mode adds a minus sign before the amount in chat view #83546

Closed

7 tasks

MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review March 3, 2026 19:53

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 3, 2026 19:53

melvin-bot bot requested review from ahmedGaber93 and joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team March 3, 2026 19:53

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team March 3, 2026 19:53

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Mar 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

ahmedGaber93 approved these changes Mar 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from Beamanator March 3, 2026 21:51

Add unit tests for calculateDiffAmount with invoice reports

5bdf9f7

Co-authored-by: ahmedGaber93 <ahmedGaber93@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 4, 2026 14:19

melvin-bot bot requested a review from ahmedGaber93 March 4, 2026 14:19

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team March 4, 2026 14:19

Add tests for getUpdatedTransaction modifiedAmount negation

f32b18c

Verify that modifiedAmount is negated when isFromExpenseReport is true and left positive when isFromExpenseReport is false. Co-authored-by: ahmedGaber93 <ahmedGaber93@users.noreply.github.com>

ahmedGaber93 approved these changes Mar 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Beamanator approved these changes Mar 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Beamanator merged commit 836a937 into main Mar 4, 2026
30 of 31 checks passed

Beamanator deleted the claude-fixInvoiceEditOfflineMinusSign branch March 4, 2026 21:00

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-03-06 #84352

Closed

92 tasks

Conversation

MelvinBot commented Mar 3, 2026

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 3, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Mar 3, 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!

ahmedGaber93 commented Mar 3, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Mar 3, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Mar 3, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 3, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 3, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 3, 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 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 Mar 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 3, 2026

Uh oh!

Beamanator commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Beamanator left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

codecov bot commented Mar 3, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading