[Internal QA] Change payer for share

[narefyev91]

Explanation of Change

Implement release 3: Share bank account when changing payer
from the bank account sharing in NewDot design doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l8ODiSIiEIE-a9zjj69ACqCHGHeLPwf4c-H5SJn3uHg/edit?tab=t.0#bookmark=id.z9fushq34kgu

Fixed Issues

$ #73252
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Tests Case 1 - bank account is in OPEN state - bank account was not shared with anyone

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick any available user
4. Verify that confirmation modal is shown
5. Agree to share bank account
6. Verify that success page is shown
7. Verify that payer is changed and bank account is shared

Tests Case 2 - bank account is in OPEN state - bank account already shared with that user before

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick user with whom bank account has been already shared before
4. Verify that RHP is closed
5. Verify that payer is changed

Tests Case 3 - bank account is in PENDING state

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick any available user
4. Verify that confirmation modal is shown - with validate text
5. Click on validate bank account - verify that validate bank account page is opened
6. Validate account
7. Move back to Workflows
8. Verify that now "Test case 1" is working

Tests Case 4 - bank account is NOT in PENDING or OPEN state

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick any available user
4. Verify that confirmation modal is shown - with text to start a chat with Owner
5. Click on start a chat - verify that chat page between selected payer and owner is opened

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick any available user
4. Verify that confirmation modal is shown
5. Agree to share bank account
6. Verify that loading indicator is shown in Save button (Pattern C)

QA Steps

Tests Case 1 - bank account is in OPEN state - bank account was not shared with anyone

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick any available user
4. Verify that confirmation modal is shown
5. Agree to share bank account
6. Verify that success page is shown
7. Verify that payer is changed and bank account is shared

Tests Case 2 - bank account is in OPEN state - bank account already shared with that user before

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick user with whom bank account has been already shared before
4. Verify that RHP is closed
5. Verify that payer is changed

Tests Case 3 - bank account is in PENDING state

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick any available user
4. Verify that confirmation modal is shown - with validate text
5. Click on validate bank account - verify that validate bank account page is opened
6. Validate account
7. Move back to Workflows
8. Verify that now "Test case 1" is working

Tests Case 4 - bank account is NOT in PENDING or OPEN state

1. Go to Workflows
2. Choose change payer
3. Pick any available user
4. Verify that confirmation modal is shown - with text to start a chat with Owner
5. Click on start a chat - verify that chat page between selected payer and owner is opened

• 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

[melvin-bot]

Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

1. Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
2. Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running:

npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/API/types.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/actions/BankAccounts.ts	4.00% <100.00%> (+1.73%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/Policy/Policy.ts	46.34% <0.00%> (+0.30%)	⬆️
...ges/workspace/workflows/WorkspaceWorkflowsPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...s/Wallet/UnshareBankAccount/UnshareBankAccount.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...e/workflows/WorkspaceWorkflowsPayerSuccessPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...orkspace/workflows/WorkspaceWorkflowsPayerPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 79 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@situchan 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]

[narefyev91]

@joekaufmanexpensify you could start testing on ad-hoc build

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b1fa576338

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".

[github-actions]

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

[github-actions]

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

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #79760.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
⏩ SKIPPED ⏩	⏩ SKIPPED ⏩
The build for Android was skipped	The build for iOS was skipped

Web 🕸️
https://79760.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[joekaufmanexpensify]

We're testing Expensify Card unshare error case here.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

BUG: We're only showing changed payer after the user closes the success page

Steps

1. Create a workspace.
2. Link a business bank account to it.
3. Invite a second admin with no bank account access.
4. Set the second admin as the workspace payer.
5. Tap to share the bank account on the modal.

Expect result

When you land on the success page on web, we should show the new payer listed in the main pane before you close the success page because the success page implies the action already occurred.

Actual result

When you land on the success page on web, we show the old payer listed in the main pane before you close the success page. We update the payer row after closing the success page. This is not a consideration on mobile where the payer row isn't visible on the success page.

2026-01-19_12-09-48.mp4

[narefyev91]

1. Create new account
2. Create new workspace
3. Invite admin (new account)
4. Go to Account > Wallet > Add bank account
5. After completing plaid flow, terminate so that bank account is in pending status
6. Go to workspace workflows > Payments section
7. Click Payer

Please confirm this is expected behavior for the above case

• Payer is current logged-in user
• Not found page shows

demo.mov

I could not reproduce based on your steps
i do not see bank account connected to the workspace on point 6
Also could you please share your Onyx data for current policy
Based on the condition:
const shouldShowBlockingPage = (isEmptyObject(policy) && !isLoadingReportData) || isPendingDeletePolicy(policy) || policy?.reimbursementChoice !== CONST.POLICY.REIMBURSEMENT_CHOICES.REIMBURSEMENT_YES;

First part is not your case (because you see error message on the screen about workspace.common.notAuthorized)
We need to check is policy marked as deleted or policy?.reimbursementChoice value

[narefyev91]

Bug: after changing payer, bank account disappears. Appears again after refresh

(check around 00:22 in video)

Screen.Recording.2026-03-14.at.4.25.44.AM.mov

Could you please also share onyx data - when you switch payer - we need to be sure that data is coming from API - seems to me something is messed up on API side/response cc @NikkiWines

[narefyev91]

@NikkiWines i checked @situchan Onyx data - and see that his user get reimbursementChoice: "reimburseManual" and based on this condition we do not allow user to view Payer page. Is it correct? cc @joekaufmanexpensify

[NikkiWines]

@narefyev91 yes that sounds correct according to this code

[NikkiWines]

Couple of very small things, otherwise looks good

I noticed we don't have any integration tests for sharing the bank account or setting the payer - ideally we'd add some for both, but maybe that can be done as a follow up to not hold up this PR any futher.

[NikkiWines]

Some spacing issues otherwise great!

[NikkiWines]

[github-actions]

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

[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.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #79760.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-858f99c-da2c958-7d7090c1895899b695622f0db921a6b89697c504/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-858f99c-da2c958-765ddd9b4770d84050ec15b59ee9ff4d1cd11af2/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://79760.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/NikkiWines in version: 9.3.40-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/NikkiWines in version: 9.3.40-0 🚀

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

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Tests well! Only thing I noticed is this Got it button is gray on staging, when it is green in the design doc. I don't think we discussed changing that yeah @narefyev91 ? That is obvi not a blocker though, we can just adjust it in a follow up, if this is not intended.

Staging

Design doc

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Marked as done for QA

[narefyev91]

Tests well! Only thing I noticed is this Got it button is gray on staging, when it is green in the design doc. I don't think we discussed changing that yeah @narefyev91 ? That is obvi not a blocker though, we can just adjust it in a follow up, if this is not intended.

Staging

### Design doc

I think now it's intentional - and coming from this one #80929 @joekaufmanexpensify

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Nice, good eye. All set then!

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.3.41-4 🚀

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