feat: add reimbursable toggle to create expense flow

[daledah]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #58588
PROPOSAL: #58588 (comment)

Tests

1. Click FAB
2. Click Create Expense
3. Enter amount and next
4. Click show more button
5. Verify that: There's a working Reimbursable toggle
6. Submit the expense
7. Verify that: There are no error
8. Submit another expense with Reimbursable toggle off
9. Go to OD
10. View the submitted expense in step 8
11. Verify that: Reimbursable checkbox is checked off

Cross-platform consistency test:

1. In OD, go to Workspace -> Expenses

2. Change the field Cash expenses are to different values

3. Verify the changes in ND matches the condition:

4. If Default reimbursable is set via OldDot, show the toggle enabled by default on expense creation.

5. If Default non-reimbursable is set via OldDot, show the toggle disabled by default on expense creation.

6. If Always non-reimbursable is set via OldDot, don't show the toggle at all and create the cash expense as non-reimbursable.

7. If Always reimbursable is set via OldDot, don't show the toggle at all and create the cash expense as reimbursable.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

1. Click FAB
2. Click Create Expense
3. Enter amount and next
4. Click show more button
5. Verify that: There's a working Reimbursable toggle
6. Submit the expense
7. Verify that: There are no error
8. Submit another expense with Reimbursable toggle off
9. Go to OD
10. View the submitted expense in step 8
11. Verify that: Reimbursable checkbox is checked off

Cross-platform consistency test:

1. In OD, go to Workspace -> Expenses

2. Change the field Cash expenses are to different values

3. Verify the changes in ND matches the condition:

4. If Default reimbursable is set via OldDot, show the toggle enabled by default on expense creation.

5. If Default non-reimbursable is set via OldDot, show the toggle disabled by default on expense creation.

6. If Always non-reimbursable is set via OldDot, don't show the toggle at all and create the cash expense as non-reimbursable.

7. If Always reimbursable is set via OldDot, don't show the toggle at all and create the cash expense as reimbursable.

• 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
  • MacOS: Desktop
• 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 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2025-03-27.at.18.28.10.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2025-03-27.at.18.29.58.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-03-27.at.18.30.53.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-03-27.at.18.35.59.mp4

Screen.Recording.2025-03-27.at.18.39.10.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2025-03-27.at.18.31.20.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@getusha 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]

[daledah]

Currently facing some troubles building Android, I'll upload the screenshot later.

[shawnborton]

cc @Expensify/design for review too

[shawnborton]

Is there a reason why we don't show the toggle in the expense details view after the expense is created?

[dannymcclain]

The toggle in the create expense flow is looking good to me, but I'm also curious about why it's not in the details view after the expense has been created.

[trjExpensify]

100% should be there when applicable.

• Not on card transactions
• Not on expenses on workspaces that have Always non-reimbursable or Always reimbursable set.
• Not on expenses on IOUreports

Then there's some rules around when it can be edited on the expense...

The toggle should abide by the same permission logic as the date and amount fields when it comes to editing, which I believe is as follows:

• Submitter: can't edit the toggle on processing reports after first level approval.
• Non-admin manager: can't edit the toggle after they've approved (i.e no longer the report's managerID)
• Admins: can't edit the toggle if it's on a report in the approved, reimbursed or closed state.

[github-actions]

🚧 @trjExpensify has triggered a test app build. You can view the workflow run here.

[dannymcclain]

Then there's some rules around when it can be edited on the expense...

@trjExpensify @Expensify/design in those situations where it should be there but it's not editable, should we still show it, but show it with the lock? I feel like that's how I would expect it to show up (since we also still show the other non-editable fields in those views).

[shawnborton]

Yeah, I think that makes sense to me too

[trjExpensify]

Yeah, I think we can show it with a lock if we want. Equally, we could just have it disabled from editing displaying as on/off depending on what it was before moving into a state where you can't edit it anymore.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/android/59209/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/59209/index.html
Android Hybrid 🤖🔄	iOS Hybrid 🍎🔄
❌ FAILED ❌	❌ FAILED ❌
The QR code can't be generated, because the Android Hybrid build failed	The QR code can't be generated, because the iOS Hybrid build failed
Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/59209/NewExpensify.dmg	https://59209.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[dubielzyk-expensify]

Oh yeah, the lock makes sense to me in those instances

[daledah]

@trjExpensify Should I implement the toggle in the report details now? In the issue we agreed that this is out of scope so I didn't make any changes.

If we decide to implement the toggle, as in my proposal:

Note

To make the toggle work, we need to make a new API endpoint similar to UpdateMoneyRequestBillable, which isn't available right now, so this part is open for discussions

So we're gonna need some BE changes

[trjExpensify]

@trjExpensify Should I implement the toggle in the report details now? In the issue we agreed that this is out of scope so I didn't make any changes.

Oh, must have misunderstood that comment. When you said inside the "expense report" I thought you were talking about some new feature at the expense report level. We for sure need to add the toggle at the "expense" level.

[flaviadefaria]

I also misunderstood your comment the @daledah. I like @trjExpensify suggestion of showing the toggle disabled from editing displaying as on/off depending on what it was before moving into a state where you can't edit it anymore.

[daledah]

@trjExpensify @flaviadefaria So the next step here should be:

1. HOLD this PR for BE changes
2. Implement reimbursable button on expense details page
3. The button will not show on card/IOU transactions
4. The button will always show on other transactions, but some will be locked (always reimbursable for example).

Does that look correct to you? Also, should the point 4 above be applied for create expense flow as well? Or should we keep current behavior?

[flaviadefaria]

Looks good to me @daledah!

Regarding:

Also, should the point 4 above be applied for create expense flow as well? Or should we keep current behavior?

I believe we should keep the current behavior. A user should be able to toggle off reimbursable expenses unless there is a special setting enabled (such as force non-reimbursable for cards or always reimbursable/always non-reimbursable). Does this make sense? Does this sound correct @trjExpensify?

[trjExpensify]

On OldDot we don't show the toggle (checkbox) at all if the setting is Always Reimbursable or Always non-reimbursable.

I think the design team suggestion was to use the lock for the cases where the selection can no longer be changed. I.e a submitter after their report is approved by at least one person.

[flaviadefaria]

Just to confirm, are we blocked here on the backend changes?

[trjExpensify]

Yea, we'll need backend changes to implement this. I've reached out to Issa and pointed to my comment here: #58588 (comment)

[flaviadefaria]

Cool, I also tagged them on the weekly updated in Slack but saw they were OoO. Hopefully they'll respond today when they're back.

[inimaga]

Hiya,
@flaviadefaria I was OOO when we realised we need the backend change. I am back today and have now picked this up and working on it. The PRs for the change will be undergoing review shortly, and you can track these here

Will provide an update once it makes it to staging, so daledah can keep working on it.

[daledah]

Hi @inimaga, just checking in - has BE changes made it to production yet? I'm ready to continue my FE work once it's live.

[melvin-bot]

@inimaga looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

[getusha]

@getusha any other concerns here?

Yes, maybe i misunderstood but even for new workspaces Reimbursable isn't enabled by default.

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[flaviadefaria]

Yes, maybe i misunderstood but even for new workspaces Reimbursable isn't enabled by default.

Oh that's a good catch, I agree that reimbursable should be enabled by default for a new workspace.

[inimaga]

Regarding failing test from @MelvinBot, failing as per comment here: #59209 (comment), failing due to getTransaction deprecation is already being handled here #61910

[inimaga]

Yes, maybe i misunderstood but even for new workspaces Reimbursable isn't enabled by default.

Oh that's a good catch, I agree that reimbursable should be enabled by default for a new workspace.

@daledah we'll need to handle this in a separate PR as this one is now merged.

[daledah]

@inimaga I've handled this in this commit - policy created has defaultReimbursable as true now.

[getusha]

@daledah could you invite a member and test from the non-admin side?

[daledah]

could you invite a member and test from the non-admin side?

In this case I think we should make BE changes to send correct defaultReimbursable value instead of always defaulting to true.

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/inimaga in version: 9.1.48-0 🚀

platform	result
🖥 desktop 🖥	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/inimaga in version: 9.1.48-0 🚀

platform	result
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/inimaga in version: 9.1.49-5 🚀

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

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/arosiclair in version: 9.1.50-0 🚀

platform	result
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	failure ❌
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅