Skip to content

Propagate billable flag through split expense flow#84600

Merged
cristipaval merged 3 commits intomainfrom
claude-fixBillableFlagInSplitExpenses
Mar 26, 2026
Merged

Propagate billable flag through split expense flow#84600
cristipaval merged 3 commits intomainfrom
claude-fixBillableFlagInSplitExpenses

Conversation

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@MelvinBot MelvinBot commented Mar 9, 2026

Explanation of Change

When a billable expense is split using "More > Split", the resulting split transactions lose the billable flag and appear as non-billable. This happens because the billable property is not propagated through the split expense data pipeline, while the parallel reimbursable property is correctly propagated everywhere.

The billable flag is briefly visible after splitting (because optimistic data at Split.ts:1185 does set it), but disappears when the server response overwrites it — since billable was never sent in the API parameters, the server returns billable: false.

This PR adds billable to three locations, mirroring the existing reimbursable pattern:

  1. The SplitExpense type definition (so the field can be stored)
  2. initSplitExpenseItemData (so billable is read from the original transaction)
  3. The splits API parameter mapping in updateSplitTransactions (so billable is sent to the backend)

The backend SplitTransactionSplitParam already supports billable — it just was never populated by the frontend.

Fixed Issues

$ #82908
PROPOSAL: #82908 (comment)

Tests

  1. Open the Expensify app with an account that has at least one workspace with rules enabled and billable defaults set as billable
  2. Open a workspace chat
  3. Create a billable and non-reimbursable manual expense
  4. Open the report of the just created expense
  5. Verify that the billable toggle is enabled
  6. Tap on "More" > "Split"
  7. Save the splits amount
  8. Open any of the splits
  9. Verify that the "Billable" toggle is enabled on the split
  10. Navigate to the second split
  11. Verify that the "Billable" toggle is also enabled
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

  1. Create a billable expense while online
  2. Go offline
  3. Split the billable expense
  4. Verify splits show as billable (optimistic data)
  5. Go back online
  6. Verify splits still show as billable after server response

QA Steps

  1. Log in with an account that has a workspace with rules enabled and billable defaults set to billable
  2. Open a workspace chat
  3. Create a billable and non-reimbursable manual expense
  4. Open the report of the created expense
  5. Confirm billable toggle is enabled
  6. Tap "More" > "Split"
  7. Save the splits
  8. Open each split and verify the "Billable" toggle is enabled on both
  • 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 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

N/A - No UI changes, data-only fix

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A - No UI changes, data-only fix

iOS: Native

N/A - No UI changes, data-only fix

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A - No UI changes, data-only fix

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A - No UI changes, data-only fix

@MelvinBot @bernhardoj
Propagate billable flag through split expense flow
725032d 
When a billable expense is split, the billable property was not being
propagated to the split transactions. This adds billable to the
SplitExpense type and ensures it is passed through initSplitExpenseItemData
and the splits API parameter array, mirroring the existing reimbursable
pattern.

Co-authored-by: Bernhard Owen Josephus <bernhardoj@users.noreply.github.com>
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from a team March 9, 2026 14:38
@MelvinBot MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Mar 9, 2026
Closed
7 tasks
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

MelvinBot commented Mar 9, 2026

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-fixBillableFlagInSplitExpenses
git checkout -b claude-fixBillableFlagInSplitExpenses upstream/claude-fixBillableFlagInSplitExpenses
git push -u origin claude-fixBillableFlagInSplitExpenses

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

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

MelvinBot commented Mar 9, 2026

The failing check (test (job 8)) is unrelated to this PR.

Analysis: The failure is in tests/ui/SessionTest.tsx — two deep linking tests are failing:

  1. should not remember the report path of the last deep link login after signing out and in again — exceeded the 120,000ms timeout
  2. should not reuse the last deep link and log in again when signing out — cascading failure ("Can't access .root on unmounted test renderer")

This PR only modifies src/libs/actions/IOU/Split.ts and src/types/onyx/IOU.ts to propagate the billable flag through split expenses. These changes have no relation to deep linking or session management.

Evidence: The timeout and unmounted renderer errors are characteristic of a flaky UI test that renders the full <App /> component. This test is timing-sensitive and can fail under CI load conditions unrelated to any code change.

Retrying the workflow should resolve this.

@bernhardoj
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bernhardoj commented Mar 17, 2026

@MelvinBot please merge with the main branch and then mark this PR as ready for review

@MelvinBot @bernhardoj
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into claude-fixBillableFla…
93a7f1a 
…gInSplitExpenses

Co-authored-by: Bernhard Owen Josephus <bernhardoj@users.noreply.github.com>
@MelvinBot MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review March 17, 2026 15:56
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 17, 2026 15:56
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from bernhardoj March 17, 2026 15:56
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot Bot commented Mar 17, 2026

@bernhardoj 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 melvin-bot Bot requested review from heyjennahay and removed request for a team March 17, 2026 15:56
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

MelvinBot commented Mar 17, 2026

Done! I've merged main into this PR branch and marked it as ready for review.

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

MelvinBot commented Mar 17, 2026

The failing check build (Debug, true) is unrelated to this PR.

Analysis: The Android build failed because an external Maven repository (repo.grails.org) returned HTTP 520 when Gradle tried to resolve io.realm:realm-annotations:10.19.0. This caused a cascading failure for 238+ other dependency resolutions. This is a transient infrastructure issue with the Grails repository.

Evidence: This PR only modifies src/libs/actions/IOU/Split.ts and src/types/onyx/IOU.ts (TypeScript files), which have no connection to Android Gradle dependency resolution. Re-running the build should resolve this.

@bernhardoj
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bernhardoj commented Mar 18, 2026 •
edited
Loading

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
web.mp4

@bernhardoj
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bernhardoj commented Mar 26, 2026

@MelvinBot please merge with the main branch

@MelvinBot @bernhardoj
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into claude-fixBillableFla…
130f78a 
…gInSplitExpenses

Co-authored-by: Bernhard Owen Josephus <bernhardoj@users.noreply.github.com>
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 26, 2026 09:19
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

MelvinBot commented Mar 26, 2026

Done! I've merged main into this branch. The merge completed cleanly with no conflicts.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested review from cristipaval and removed request for a team March 26, 2026 09:19
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot Bot commented Mar 26, 2026

@cristipaval 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]

@cristipaval cristipaval merged commit e01c22b into main Mar 26, 2026
36 checks passed
@cristipaval cristipaval deleted the claude-fixBillableFlagInSplitExpenses branch March 26, 2026 12:29
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Mar 26, 2026

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

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Mar 26, 2026

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #84600.

Android 🤖 iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-e01c22b-23e70e6-1499fe4b3727545e9a9a0a4f1b166514b55ab6e7/index.html https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-e01c22b-23e70e6-78af505a931d03be02d452fb006d4b15c9fdcebd/index.html
Android iOS
Web 🕸️
https://84600.pr-testing.expensify.com
Web

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Mar 26, 2026

✋ 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 OSBotify mentioned this pull request Mar 26, 2026
Closed
29 tasks
@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Mar 26, 2026

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.3.49-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Mar 27, 2026

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.3.49-2 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@cristipaval cristipaval cristipaval approved these changes

@heyjennahay heyjennahay Awaiting requested review from heyjennahay

+1 more reviewer

@bernhardoj bernhardoj bernhardoj approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@bernhardoj bernhardoj

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@MelvinBot @bernhardoj @OSBotify @cristipaval