[Due for payment 2025-12-08] [$250] Reports-Advance filter amount not populated for negative expense

[mitarachim]

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: V9.2.59-4
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: N/a
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): Slottwo1 l@gmail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: Redminote 10s android 13
App Component: User Settings

Action Performed:

1. Go to https://staging.new.expensify.com/home
2. Go to workspace chat
3. Create an expense with amount 6.80 and other expense with amount -4
4. Go to Reports
5. Enter in search type: expense amount:6.80
6. Select the suggestion shown and tap enter
7. Note expense is shown
8. Tap Advance filter button and look for "Amount" section
9. Note amount section shows "Equal to 6.80"
10. Enter in search type: expense amount:-4
11. Select the suggestion shown and tap enter
12. Note expense is shown
13. Tap Advance filter button and look for "Amount" section
14. Note amount section is blank

Expected Result:

The Advanced Filter → Amount section should correctly display Equal to -4 for negative expenses, just like it does for positive amount.

Actual Result:

For negative expenses, the Amount section in Advanced Filter remains blank, even though the expense is displayed in search results.

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

Bug7006983_1763435411377.Screenrecorder-2025-11-18-08-30-25-832.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021991028302051502575
• Upwork Job ID: 1991028302051502575
• Last Price Increase: 2025-11-19

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @brianlee-expensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @brianlee-expensify (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.

[ShridharGoel]

Proposal

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

Search correctly shows expenses when the query includes a negative amount (for example expense amount:-4), but the Advanced Filter panel leaves the Amount section blank instead of showing “Equal to -4”.

What is the root cause of that problem?

When we rebuild Advanced Filter form values from the parsed query, we validate amount tokens with validateAmount without allowing negatives. Negative amounts therefore fail validation and are discarded for all amount comparators.

App/src/libs/SearchQueryUtils.ts

Lines 805 to 827 in f34c0e3

	if (AMOUNT_FILTER_KEYS.includes(filterKey as SearchAmountFilterKeys)) {
	const negatedKey = `${filterKey}${CONST.SEARCH.NOT_MODIFIER}` as `${SearchAmountFilterKeys}${typeof CONST.SEARCH.NOT_MODIFIER}`;
	const equalToKey = `${filterKey}${CONST.SEARCH.AMOUNT_MODIFIERS.EQUAL_TO}` as `${SearchAmountFilterKeys}${typeof CONST.SEARCH.AMOUNT_MODIFIERS.EQUAL_TO}`;
	const lessThanKey = `${filterKey}${CONST.SEARCH.AMOUNT_MODIFIERS.LESS_THAN}` as `${SearchAmountFilterKeys}${typeof CONST.SEARCH.AMOUNT_MODIFIERS.LESS_THAN}`;
	const greaterThanKey = `${filterKey}${CONST.SEARCH.AMOUNT_MODIFIERS.GREATER_THAN}` as `${SearchAmountFilterKeys}${typeof CONST.SEARCH.AMOUNT_MODIFIERS.GREATER_THAN}`;
	// backend amount is an integer and is 2 digits longer than frontend amount
	filtersForm[equalToKey] =
	filterList
	.find((filter) => filter.operator === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_OPERATORS.EQUAL_TO && validateAmount(filter.value.toString(), 0, CONST.IOU.AMOUNT_MAX_LENGTH + 2))
	?.value.toString() ?? filtersForm[equalToKey];
	filtersForm[lessThanKey] =
	filterList
	.find((filter) => filter.operator === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_OPERATORS.LOWER_THAN && validateAmount(filter.value.toString(), 0, CONST.IOU.AMOUNT_MAX_LENGTH + 2))
	?.value.toString() ?? filtersForm[lessThanKey];
	filtersForm[greaterThanKey] =
	filterList
	.find((filter) => filter.operator === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_OPERATORS.GREATER_THAN && validateAmount(filter.value.toString(), 0, CONST.IOU.AMOUNT_MAX_LENGTH + 2))
	?.value.toString() ?? filtersForm[greaterThanKey];
	filtersForm[negatedKey] =
	filterList
	.find((filter) => filter.operator === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_OPERATORS.NOT_EQUAL_TO && validateAmount(filter.value.toString(), 0, CONST.IOU.AMOUNT_MAX_LENGTH + 2))
	?.value.toString() ?? filtersForm[negatedKey];

.

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

• Allow negative numbers when validating parsed amount filters so we retain equal, less than, greater than, and not equal negative values.

Updated code snippet:

// src/libs/SearchQueryUtils.ts (within buildFilterFormValuesFromQuery)
filtersForm[equalToKey] =
    filterList
        .find((filter) => filter.operator === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_OPERATORS.EQUAL_TO && validateAmount(filter.value.toString(), 0, CONST.IOU.AMOUNT_MAX_LENGTH + 2, true))
        ?.value.toString() ?? filtersForm[equalToKey];
filtersForm[lessThanKey] =
    filterList
        .find((filter) => filter.operator === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_OPERATORS.LOWER_THAN && validateAmount(filter.value.toString(), 0, CONST.IOU.AMOUNT_MAX_LENGTH + 2, true))
        ?.value.toString() ?? filtersForm[lessThanKey];
filtersForm[greaterThanKey] =
    filterList
        .find((filter) => filter.operator === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_OPERATORS.GREATER_THAN && validateAmount(filter.value.toString(), 0, CONST.IOU.AMOUNT_MAX_LENGTH + 2, true))
        ?.value.toString() ?? filtersForm[greaterThanKey];
filtersForm[negatedKey] =
    filterList
        .find((filter) => filter.operator === CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_OPERATORS.NOT_EQUAL_TO && validateAmount(filter.value.toString(), 0, CONST.IOU.AMOUNT_MAX_LENGTH + 2, true))
        ?.value.toString() ?? filtersForm[negatedKey];

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021991028302051502575

[melvin-bot]

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

[akinwale]

@ShridharGoel's proposal looks good here.

🎀👀🎀 C+ reviewed.

[melvin-bot]

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