[Due for payment 2025-04-28] [$250] Expense preview - Expense preview shows "Receiver > Payer" instead of "Payer > Receiver"

[jponikarchuk]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.1.22-2
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: No
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: No, reproducible on hybrid only
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: Exp #58479
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Mac 15.3 / Chrome
App Component: Money Requests

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• Log in with Expensifail account,

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to 1:1 DM.
3. Click + > Pay user.
4. Enter amount > Next.
5. Click Pay elsewhere.

Expected Result:

The expense preview should show that "Payer > Receiver" (we can double confirm this iin Reports).

Actual Result:

The expense preview shows "Receiver > Payer" instead.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• 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/~021907390149084405396
• Upwork Job ID: 1907390149084405396
• Last Price Increase: 2025-04-02

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.

[zanyrenney]

adding external

[zanyrenney]

It is a minor UI adjustment, but if this is being stored or displayed incorrectly, we'll want a deeper investigation.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021907390149084405396

[melvin-bot]

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

[samranahm]

@jponikarchuk Just out of curiosity, do we really need to Login with Expensifail account? Is there some UIs limited to Expensifail accounts? cc @rushatgabhane

[ChavdaSachin]

Proposal

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

Expense preview - Expense preview shows "Receiver > Payer" instead of "Payer > Receiver"

What is the root cause of that problem?

Small logical mistake during implementation here, managerID and ownerAccountID passed here are passed in reverse order.

App/src/libs/TransactionPreviewUtils.ts

Lines 54 to 55 in 9a58e7d

	const fromID = chooseIDBasedOnAmount(amount, managerID, ownerAccountID);
	const toID = chooseIDBasedOnAmount(amount, ownerAccountID, managerID);

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

Change the order of managerID and ownerAccountID passed here.

App/src/libs/TransactionPreviewUtils.ts

Lines 54 to 55 in 9a58e7d

	const fromID = chooseIDBasedOnAmount(amount, managerID, ownerAccountID);
	const toID = chooseIDBasedOnAmount(amount, ownerAccountID, managerID);

    const fromID = chooseIDBasedOnAmount(amount, ownerAccountID, managerID);
    const toID = chooseIDBasedOnAmount(amount, managerID, ownerAccountID);

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

NA

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Could be corrected by fixing the function body of chooseIDBasedOnAmount to work inversely, or any other small similar change.

[rushatgabhane]

LGTM 🎀👀🎀

#59526 (comment)

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @deetergp, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[jponikarchuk]

Just out of curiosity, do we really need to Login with Expensifail account? Is there some UIs limited to Expensifail accounts?

@samranahm We mean that the user should log in as Expensifail account, not Gmail account

[ChavdaSachin]

@samranahm based on your question, it seems you're new here. I would recommend you to go through https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/e15c63350bcfac084ec847372fc819a46eba301b/README.md and https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/e15c63350bcfac084ec847372fc819a46eba301b/contributingGuides/CONTRIBUTING.md .

[ChavdaSachin]

@rushatgabhane I am thinking to modify chooseIDBasedOnAmount to return a pair of [fromID, toID] so we need to call this function only in one way and hence it might reduce complexity and increase clarity.

Sounds good?

[rushatgabhane]

it doesn't have any other usage, so i think we should not touch it.

i agree that the function itself is really difficult wrap your head around.
maybe we can rename it to getPayerAccountId()

[nkdengineer]

I think it's a backend issue. When user A pays an expense for user B, user A is the payer, and user B is the receiver. It's correct. The problem comes from the Reports page. The image below shows two transactions: the first one is user A creating a pay user for user B, and the second is user A creating an expense for user B. The backend is returning the wrong accountID and managerID of the pay transaction.

[ChavdaSachin]

tnx @nkdengineer.
I looked deeper into it and figured the managerID is payerID and the ownerID the payeeID is our conventional implementation.
And hence BE seems to be perfectly working, perhaps we need to fix search page as well.

[nkdengineer]

I mean it's the wrong transaction data in snapshot.

[ChavdaSachin]

@nkdengineer I checked again and for every transaction ManagerID reflects payer account and ownerID reflects receiver account and hence BE response is consistent.

[ChavdaSachin]

@zanyrenney
sorry to bother you,
I am kind of in need to be on Expensify-Slack channel for some discussion related to current issue.
But for last 6-7 months I am trying to get onboard on Expensify Slack channel but not receiving the invitation.
could you maybe invite me to the slack.

Thank you.

ps. Email: [email protected]

[rushatgabhane]

^ the discussion is Resolved but i don't think @ChavdaSachin is on slack

[deetergp]

Hi @ChavdaSachin, unfortunately, we are stuck in the same situation with regard to Inviting new contributors into our Slack group. When you first tried to get in, were you asked to fill out a form? And if so, did you?

[ChavdaSachin]

Yes I've filled the form.
And I've recently got an update here.

Also @ChavdaSachin you'll be invited to #expensify-open-source pretty soon. I need to create an automated process for new invites and I haven't been able to prioritize it quite yet.

So I should receive the invitation soon.

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.1.30-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix UserInfoCellsWithArrow for correct preview #59806

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-04-28. 🎊

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @rushatgabhane requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @ChavdaSachin requires payment (Needs manual offer from BZ)

[melvin-bot]

@rushatgabhane @zanyrenney @rushatgabhane The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• Reviewer: @rushatgabhane owed $250 via NewDot
• ROLE: @ChavdaSachin paid $(AMOUNT) via Upwork (LINK)

BugZero Checklist (@zanyrenney)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the necessary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants/1907390149084405396/hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[zanyrenney]

hey @ChavdaSachin - you never applied to the job.

[zanyrenney]

Please can you apply here? https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021907390149084405396 I just tried to invite you to the job, but I'm unable to find you on upwork. @ChavdaSachin

[ChavdaSachin]

@zanyrenney applied for the job.

Upwork profile: https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~016a0f0a12bce54a49

[ChavdaSachin]

@zanyrenney can you please accept the proposal and release the payment.
thank you.

[ChavdaSachin]

@zanyrenney bump on above ^

[zanyrenney]

taking a look!

[zanyrenney]

@ChavdaSachin all rehired!

[zanyrenney]

offer is pending!

[ChavdaSachin]

Accepted the offer

[zanyrenney]

Payment summary

Reviewer: @rushatgabhane owed $250 via NewDot - please request $250 via ND.
ROLE: @ChavdaSachin paid $(AMOUNT) via Upwork (LINK) - paid $250 via upwork.

[garrettmknight]

$250 approved for @rushatgabhane