Revert isPayer membership check to restore role-based payer check by MelvinBot · Pull Request #93700 · Expensify/App

MelvinBot · 2026-06-16T13:34:49Z

Explanation of Change

This reverts the isPayer change introduced in #81303, restoring the previous role-based payer check.

PR #81303 changed isPayer to additionally gate payer status on workspace membership via policy.employeeList. That approach is flaky because policy.employeeList can be loaded only partially from the backend and may not include the current user. When the current user is missing from policy.employeeList, isPayer incorrectly returns false, which in turn makes isExportAction return false and hides the Export to integration bulk action until the full employee list is loaded (for example, after opening a report).

PR #81303 was intended to $ #81096, but that issue can no longer be reproduced, so it is safe to revert and restore the previous role-based check.

Changes:

Removed the employeeList/membership gating block from isPayer in src/libs/ReportUtils.ts and restored the original policy resolution.
Removed the now-unused isPolicyMemberWithoutPendingDelete import.
Removed the two unit tests added by [Home Page] Prevent Pay action from showing after user leaves workspace #81303 that asserted the membership-based behavior.

Fixed Issues

$ #92976 (comment)
PROPOSAL: #92976 (comment)

Tests

1. Verify the original bug from #81096 is NOT reintroduced (the reason #81303 was created):

Precondition: Admin invites a non-admin approver and a member to the workspace.

[Member] Go to the workspace chat.
[Member] Create an expense. Do not click Submit on the preview.
[Non-admin approver] Open the member's workspace chat.
[Non-admin approver] Leave the workspace.
[Non-admin approver] Go to Home.
Verify that "Pay 1 report" does NOT appear in the For you section after the approver leaves the workspace.

2. Verify the export bulk action appears without opening the report first (#92976):

Precondition: You have a workspace connected to an accounting integration (e.g., NetSuite), with reports in the approved/awaiting-export state.

Clear cache and restart.
Go to Spend > Reports (or Spend > Awaiting export).
Bulk-select the approved reports.
Verify both "Export to [integration]" and "Mark as manually exported" appear in the bulk-select menu immediately, without having to open a report first.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests.

QA Steps

Same as Tests above.

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

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

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.10.02.49.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.3.37.43.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.3.32.00.PM.mov

Reverts the employeeList/membership-based gating added in #81303 so the Export to integration action is no longer hidden when policy.employeeList is only partially loaded. Co-authored-by: ahmedGaber93 <ahmedGaber93@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-06-16T13:41:53Z

The only failing check is PR Author Checklist / checklist, and it fails for a reason I can't fix by pushing code:

##[error]PR Author Checklist is not completely filled out. Please check every box to verify you've thought about the item.

That check only passes once the author ticks every box in the ### PR Author Checklist section of the PR description. It's not a code defect.

Every automated check passes — typecheck, all 8 test jobs, knip, ESLint, Prettier, React Compiler, Storybook, and all builds. (baseline-perf-tests / branch-perf-tests are still-running benchmarks, not failures.)

To make checks green: complete the PR Author Checklist (and fill in/confirm the Tests, Offline tests, and QA Steps sections, or add [No QA] to the title if applicable). No code change is needed.

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-06-17T12:41:18Z

@MelvinBot please do the following

Update Fixed Issues to be [Due for payment 2026-06-26] [Due for payment 2026-06-25] [$250] Both Export to accounting options don't show in the bulk select menu until opening the report first. #92976 (comment) instead of [Due for payment 2026-06-26] [Due for payment 2026-06-25] [$250] Both Export to accounting options don't show in the bulk select menu until opening the report first. #92976
Mark all author checklist as checked
Mark this PR as ready for review

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-06-17T13:05:33Z

@MelvinBot Mark all author checklist as checked

melvin-bot · 2026-06-17T13:13:54Z

@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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: c9d3a49b80

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 · 2026-06-17T13:18:35Z

-        }
-    }
-
+    const policy = reportPolicy ?? allPolicies?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY}${iouReport?.policyID}`] ?? null;


Restore the workspace policy guard for payers

When a user leaves a workspace and the report's policy is no longer available locally, this now falls through instead of rejecting the workspace report. Because isMoneyRequestReport() also includes expense reports, the final manager check can still return true for an expense report whose managerID is the former user, and callers such as ReportPreviewActionUtils.canPay treat missing policy payments as enabled. In that leave-workspace/missing-policy state, the former approver can still see pay-related UI for workspace expenses, which is the regression the removed test covered.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@MelvinBot add this condition here:

if no policy is found, let’s return early.

if (!policy && !isIOUReport(iouReport) && iouReport?.policyID && iouReport.policyID !== CONST.POLICY.ID_FAKE) { return false; }

Done in 24f26c3. Added the early return right after the policy resolution in isPayer:

if (!policy && !isIOUReport(iouReport) && iouReport?.policyID && iouReport.policyID !== CONST.POLICY.ID_FAKE) { return false; }

This rejects workspace reports when the policy isn't available locally (e.g. after the user leaves the workspace), which also addresses the regression the codex bot flagged above.

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

melvin-bot · 2026-06-17T18:08:37Z

@pecanoro 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 · 2026-06-17T18:15:32Z

@MelvinBot Please add a complete author checklist from here, and mark all items as checked

pecanoro · 2026-06-17T18:34:52Z

@ahmedGaber93 We are missing the videos/screenshots. Also, are the QA steps the same as the tests?

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-06-17T19:04:21Z

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

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.3.32.00.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.3.37.43.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.10.02.49.PM.mov

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-06-17T19:14:00Z

@MelvinBot Please update offline steps to be

Verify the original bug from #81096 is NOT reintroduced (the reason #81303 was created):

Precondition: Admin invites a non-admin approver and a member to the workspace.

Online steps

[Member] Go to the workspace chat.
[Member] Create an expense. Do not click Submit on the preview.
[Non-admin approver] Open the member's workspace chat.

Offline steps

[Non-admin approver] Leave the workspace.
[Non-admin approver] Go to Home.
Verify that "Pay 1 report" does NOT appear in the For you section after the approver leaves the workspace.

MelvinBot · 2026-06-17T19:18:08Z

Updated the Offline tests section to split test 1 into Online steps (1–3) and Offline steps (4–6) as requested.

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-06-17T19:18:46Z

@MelvinBot update Screenshots/Videos on your author checklist to be

Screenshots/Videos

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.10.02.49.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.3.37.43.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-06-17.at.3.32.00.PM.mov

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-06-17T19:48:43Z

@MelvinBot Could you check why author checklist failed

MelvinBot · 2026-06-17T19:50:41Z

The author checklist failed because not every checkbox in the PR description was ticked. From the failed run log:

You completed 25 out of 49 checklist items with 0 unfinished items

##[error]PR Author Checklist is not completely filled out. Please check every box to verify you've thought about the item.

The check counts all checkboxes in the PR template, not just the "PR Author Checklist" section — including the Verify that no errors appear in the JS console boxes in the Tests and QA Steps sections, which were still unchecked at the time.

Good news: this is already resolved. A newer run of the same check (run 27715348219, 19:47 UTC) ran after the failing one (19:20 UTC) and passed, so the remaining boxes were ticked in the meantime. No action needed.

pecanoro · 2026-06-17T20:05:56Z

@MelvinBot Can you add the elements you remove from the PR Author Checklist section in the PR description?

MelvinBot · 2026-06-17T20:09:54Z

Done — I restored the full PR Author Checklist in the description. The previously-checked items keep their checked state; the restored items (the proper code patterns sub-items and the conditional If a new file/CSS/asset…, UI, Storybook, deeplink, etc. items) are left unchecked for the author to review and tick as applicable.

github-actions · 2026-06-17T20:16:12Z

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

github-actions · 2026-06-17T20:22:18Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #93700.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-6ad9ea94b6a-a3adc64-f4fe4276c8d35596293bbe8cc08b604f2ca546fe/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-6ad9ea9-a3adc64-ae0854b68cc59bdc35c91e6843692d4327ddb6f0/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://93700.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-06-17T20:22:37Z

✋ 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 · 2026-06-18T17:18:16Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/pecanoro in version: 9.4.15-0 🚀

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

MelvinBot · 2026-06-18T17:21:13Z

🤖 No help site changes required.

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site files under App/docs/articles and no documentation updates are needed.

Why: This PR is a pure internal-logic revert. It restores the previous role-based isPayer check in src/libs/ReportUtils.ts (removing the employeeList/membership gating added by #81303) and removes the two associated unit tests. There are:

No new or changed user-facing features
No new or changed UI text, tab names, settings labels, or buttons
No change to documented product behavior

If anything, this restores the originally documented behavior — the Export to integration bulk action now appears as expected without needing to open a report first. Since the help site already reflects that intended behavior, there is nothing to update.

@ahmedGaber93, no help site PR was created since no docs changes are required. Please confirm you agree with this assessment — if you believe a docs update is needed, let me know what behavior changed and I'll create the draft PR.

OSBotify · 2026-06-19T15:24:08Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.4.15-3 🚀

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

MelvinBot assigned ahmedGaber93 Jun 16, 2026

MelvinBot requested a review from a team June 16, 2026 13:34

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Jun 16, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-06-26] [Due for payment 2026-06-25] [$250] Both Export to accounting options don't show in the bulk select menu until opening the report first. #92976

Open

7 tasks

MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review June 17, 2026 13:13

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner June 17, 2026 13:13

melvin-bot Bot requested review from ahmedGaber93 and heyjennahay and removed request for a team June 17, 2026 13:13

melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team June 17, 2026 13:13

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

Return early from isPayer when no policy is found for a workspace report

24f26c3

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

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner June 17, 2026 18:08

melvin-bot Bot requested review from pecanoro and removed request for a team June 17, 2026 18:08

ahmedGaber93 approved these changes Jun 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

Copilot started work on behalf of pecanoro June 17, 2026 19:54 View session

pecanoro approved these changes Jun 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

pecanoro merged commit 6ad9ea9 into main Jun 17, 2026
42 of 73 checks passed

pecanoro deleted the claude-revertIsPayerMembershipCheck branch June 17, 2026 20:14

Copilot stopped work on behalf of pecanoro due to an error June 17, 2026 20:15
The session was cancelled by the user.

Copilot AI requested a review from pecanoro June 17, 2026 20:15

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jun 18, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-06-18 #93956

Closed

45 tasks

Uh oh!

Conversation

MelvinBot commented Jun 16, 2026 • edited by pecanoro 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!

MelvinBot commented Jun 16, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 17, 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 Jun 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 Jun 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MelvinBot Jun 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

pecanoro commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

pecanoro commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 17, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 18, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 18, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 19, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 16, 2026 •

edited by pecanoro

Loading

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

ahmedGaber93 commented Jun 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading