[Due for payment 2025-10-21] [$250] Expense - Review and red dot display after submit manual expense which add picture to receipt

[jponikarchuk]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: v9.2.2-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: Explore
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): N/A
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Win 11/Chrome
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

Precondition: Create a workspace, enable Delay submissions manually, Add approvals and Make or track payments

1. Open https://staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to workspace chat
3. Create a manual expense
4. Click on this expense
5. Upload a picture to receipt
6. Click Submit
7. Return to expense preview
8. Click on Review

Expected Result:

Review button only displays if have error message

Actual Result:

Review button is displayed on expense preview and red dot on LHN but no error message in expense detail

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: App
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: App
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• iOS: mWeb Chrome
• Windows: Chrome
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

1.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021965736867491332301
• Upwork Job ID: 1965736867491332301
• Last Price Increase: 2025-09-10
• Automatic offers:
• abzokhattab | Contributor | 108744342

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @zanyrenney

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @zanyrenney (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[daledah]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Review and red dot display after submit manual expense which add picture to receipt

What is the root cause of that problem?

we have this violation when the user added the image manual

Then we will return as false in canApprove function because of hasAnyViolations is true

App/src/libs/ReportPreviewActionUtils.ts

Line 102 in 2c4dcba

return isExpense && isProcessing && !!isApprovalEnabled && (!hasAnyViolations || !shouldConsiderViolations) && reportTransactions.length > 0 && isCurrentUserManager;

Additionally we are not showing the RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED violation to the submitter here

App/src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts

Lines 1070 to 1072 in 2c4dcba

	if (violationName === CONST.VIOLATIONS.RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED) {
	return isPolicyMember && !isSubmitter && !isReportOpen;
	}

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We should also show this violation to the submitter

    if (violationName === CONST.VIOLATIONS.RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED) {
        return isPolicyMember && !isReportOpen;
    }

App/src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts

Lines 1070 to 1072 in 2c4dcba

	if (violationName === CONST.VIOLATIONS.RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED) {
	return isPolicyMember && !isSubmitter && !isReportOpen;
	}

Note: We can review the condition here, we can add approver, admin... in this condition depending on the decision of the internal team

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

We can write a test function for the shouldShowViolation function to cover this case

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[abzokhattab]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Review button and red dot display after submit manual expense which add picture to receipt, but no error message in expense detail

What is the root cause of that problem?

• The issue is in the canReview function in ReportPreviewActionUtils where it uses hasAnyViolations which checks if violations exist, but doesn't consider whether those violations are visible to the current user
  

  App/src/libs/ReportPreviewActionUtils.ts

  Line 197 in 2c4dcba

  !hasAnyViolations ||

• When a submitter manually adds a receipt, a RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED violation is created but hidden from the submitter (per the design in issue [Due for payment 2025-07-23] [$500] [Auth Violations] Update client code for NewDot and Classic versions of the app to decide when to show some violations #63894:

  receiptNotSmartScanned: should be shown if all the following are true:
  The user has access to the workspace
  The user is not the submitter, and
  The user is not a workspace admin or the report isn't open

App/src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts

Lines 1070 to 1072 in 2c4dcba

	if (violationName === CONST.VIOLATIONS.RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED) {
	return isPolicyMember && !isSubmitter && !isReportOpen;
	}

• This causes hasAnyViolations to return true (violations exist) but the submitter sees no error messages (violations not visible), resulting in the Review button showing incorrectly

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

• Update the canReview function to check for violations that are actually visible to the current user by using the existing shouldShowViolation logic:

• to do that, we need to add a helper function (can be added as a util function)

function hasVisibleViolationsForUser(report: Report, violations: OnyxCollection<TransactionViolation[]>, policy?: Policy, transactions?: Transaction[]): boolean {
    if (!violations || !transactions) {
        return false;
    }

    return transactions.some((transaction) => {
        const transactionViolations = violations[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${transaction.transactionID}`];
        if (!transactionViolations) {
            return false;
        }

        return transactionViolations.some((violation) => {
            return shouldShowViolation(report, policy, violation.name);
        });
    });
}

• then inside the canReview function use:

    const hasVisibleViolations = hasAnyViolations && hasVisibleViolationsForUser(report, violations, policy, transactions);

and update this to :

    if (
        !hasVisibleViolations ||

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

• Test that Review button doesn't show for submitters when RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED violation exists but is hidden
• Test that Review button shows for non-submitters when RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED violation is visible

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

NA

[lorretheboy]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Expense - Review and red dot display after submit manual expense which add picture to receipt

What is the root cause of that problem?

The user was seeing a receiptNotSmartScanned violation (red dot indicator) even though they were the submitter of the expense. According to the existing shouldShowViolation logic in TransactionUtils.ts, this violation should NOT be shown to submitters:

App/src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts

Lines 1070 to 1072 in 27f5fc2

	if (violationName === CONST.VIOLATIONS.RECEIPT_NOT_SMART_SCANNED) {
	return isPolicyMember && !isSubmitter && !isReportOpen;
	}

However, the violation was still appearing in places:
Report Preview - Showing "Review" button instead of "Submit/Approve"
Left Hand Navigation (LHN) - Showing red dot indicator
Search preview
...

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

1. Fix Report Preview - Showing "Review" button instead of "Submit/Approve"

Create util function for check visible vilotions for LHN

function hasVisibleViolationsForLHN(report: OnyxEntry<Report>, transactionViolations: OnyxCollection<TransactionViolation[]>, policy?: OnyxEntry<Policy>): boolean {
    if (!report || !transactionViolations) {
        return false;
    }

    const transactions = getReportTransactions(report.reportID);
    return transactions.some((transaction) => {
        const violationsForTransaction = transactionViolations[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${transaction.transactionID}`];
        if (!violationsForTransaction) {
            return false;
        }

        return violationsForTransaction.some((violation) => {
            return shouldShowViolation(report, policy, violation.name);
        });
    });
}

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Line 8122 in 9b653ae

Then update condition to show violations RBR In LHN to match with report details

    const policy = getPolicy(report.policyID);

    // If any report has a violation that should be visible to the current user, then it should have a RBR
    const potentialReports = Object.values(reportsByPolicyID[report.policyID] ?? {}) ?? [];
    return potentialReports.some((potentialReport) => {
        if (!potentialReport || isInvoiceReport(potentialReport)) {
            return false;
        }

        return hasVisibleViolationsForLHN(potentialReport, transactionViolations, policy);
    });

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 8140 to 8153 in 9b653ae

	// If any report has a violation, then it should have a RBR
	const potentialReports = Object.values(reportsByPolicyID[report.policyID] ?? {}) ?? [];
	return potentialReports.some((potentialReport) => {
	if (!potentialReport) {
	return false;
	}
	return (
	!isInvoiceReport(potentialReport) &&
	(hasViolations(potentialReport.reportID, transactionViolations, true) ||
	hasWarningTypeViolations(potentialReport.reportID, transactionViolations, true) ||
	hasNoticeTypeViolations(potentialReport.reportID, transactionViolations, true))
	);
	});

2. Fix: Left Hand Navigation (LHN) - Showing red dot indicator

Create function to check visible for violations for user

function hasVisibleViolationsForUser(report: Report, violations: OnyxCollection<TransactionViolation[]>, policy?: Policy, transactions?: Transaction[]): boolean {
    if (!violations || !transactions) {
        return false;
    }

    return transactions.some((transaction) => {
        const transactionViolations = violations[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${transaction.transactionID}`];
        if (!transactionViolations) {
            return false;
        }

        return transactionViolations.some((violation) => {
            return shouldShowViolation(report, policy, violation.name);
        });
    });
}

    const hasVisibleViolations = hasAnyViolations && hasVisibleViolationsForUser(report, violations, policy, transactions);

...

    // Update hasAnyViolations to use hasVisibleViolations in if statement

App/src/libs/ReportPreviewActionUtils.ts

Lines 196 to 202 in d521abf

	if (
	!hasAnyViolations ||
	isReimbursed ||
	(!(isSubmitter && isOpen && policy?.areWorkflowsEnabled) &&
	!canApprove(report, violations, policy, transactions, false) &&
	!canPay(report, violations, isReportArchived, policy, policy, false))
	) {

3. Fix: Search preview

function hasVisibleViolationsForSearch(report: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report>, violations: OnyxCollection<OnyxTypes.TransactionViolation[]>, policy?: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Policy>, transactions?: OnyxTypes.Transaction[]): boolean {
    if (!report || !violations || !transactions) {
        return false;
    }

    return transactions.some((transaction) => {
        const transactionViolations = violations[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${transaction.transactionID}`];
        if (!transactionViolations) {
            return false;
        }

        return transactionViolations.some((violation) => {
            return shouldShowViolation(report, policy, violation.name);
        });
    });
}

....
    const hasAnyViolationsForReport = hasAnyViolations(report.reportID, allViolations, allReportTransactions);
    const hasVisibleViolationsForReport = hasAnyViolationsForReport && hasVisibleViolationsForSearch(report, allViolations, policy, allReportTransactions);
    if ((isSubmitter || isApprover || isAdmin) && hasVisibleViolationsForReport) {

App/src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts

Line 1156 in c5e797a

if ((isSubmitter || isApprover || isAdmin) && hasAnyViolations(report.reportID, allViolations, allReportTransactions)) {

We need to do similar to all other places that showing error indicator

Note: We may have some minor changes and refactor which can be discussed in PR phase if needed

Before:

After:

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

Update tests to cover this case for LHN and report preview

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021965736867491332301

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @brunovjk (External)