[No QA] Create Reimbursement-Payment-Methods.md

[stephanieelliott]

Related: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/601019

Created to address:

2. Reimbursement Methods & International Payments Guide

Expected Impact: HIGH

Signal	Evidence
Search data	Consistently thinnest results (605-700 bytes) for "SGD reimbursement", "global reimbursements", "direct ach", "direct reimbursement", "can i get reimbursed with a check"
Escalation data	167 low-confidence "Reimbursements" escalations/week -- international bank issues, payment method confusion, missing status updates
Concierge friction	Reimbursement delays/confusion is a recurring friction theme

Recommendation: Create/expand reimbursement content covering:

• All available payment methods (ACH, check, global/international)
• Currency-specific setup guides (especially non-USD)
• Reimbursement status tracking and timeline expectations
• Common failure reasons and resolution steps
• Add keyword coverage for "direct reimbursement", "global", "SGD", "CAD", "check payment"

Est. weekly impact: 50-70 fewer escalations + highest search gap closure

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://32f37e35.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/wallet-and-payments/Global-Reimbursement-Europe
• articles/new-expensify/wallet-and-payments/Global-Reimbursement-Singapore
• articles/new-expensify/wallet-and-payments/Reimbursement-Payment-Methods

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This is a well-structured new article that fills a significant content gap around reimbursement payment methods, timelines, and supported currencies. The writing is clear, the step-by-step instructions are easy to follow, and the article directly addresses the search and escalation data cited in the PR description. There are a few structural and consistency issues that should be resolved before merging.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 8/10 - Clear, well-organized prose at an appropriate reading level. Step-by-step instructions are concise and scannable. Minor issues: the intro states "one of two methods" then effectively describes three options (ACH, global, Pay elsewhere), which could momentarily confuse readers even though ACH and global are subcategories of "direct reimbursement." The relationship between these concepts could be made slightly more explicit.
• AI Readiness: 7/10 - Good YAML metadata with a well-formed internalScope and strong keyword coverage. However, the heading hierarchy has an inconsistency that will hurt AI parsing (see Key Findings), and some FAQ headings lack question marks which reduces their effectiveness as self-contained question-answer pairs for retrieval.
• Style Compliance: 7/10 - Consistent use of Expensify terminology (Workspace Admin, member, Pay elsewhere). Formatting and bold usage for UI elements is correct throughout. Deductions are for the heading level inconsistency, a likely typo in a link, and a minor content inconsistency in the final FAQ answer.

Key Findings

Issues to address:

1. Heading hierarchy inconsistency (H1 vs H2): The "ACH reimbursement timelines" section uses ## (H2), but the parallel "Global Reimbursement timelines" section uses # (H1). These are sibling sections covering the same type of content (timelines) and should both use ##. Similarly, "Supported Currencies for Global Reimbursement" is a ## under the # Global Reimbursement timelines heading, which creates an unintended parent-child relationship. Per HelpDot conventions, articles should use # only for major top-level sections and ## for subsections. The recommended structure would be to make "Global Reimbursement timelines" an ## heading to match "ACH reimbursement timelines."

2. Broken or malformed link to Singapore guide: The Supported Currencies section links to Global-Reimbursement--Singapore (note the double dash). This is likely a typo and should be Global-Reimbursement-Singapore. Additionally, no Global-Reimbursement-Singapore.md file currently exists in the repository, so this link will 404. Either the file needs to be created as a companion PR, or the link should be removed or noted as forthcoming.

3. FAQ headings missing question marks: All four FAQ headings are phrased as questions but lack terminal question marks (e.g., "What is direct reimbursement" should be "What is direct reimbursement?"). This is important for AI retrieval since these headings serve as the question in a Q&A pair.

4. Currency list inconsistency in final FAQ answer: The last FAQ answer ("When is Pay elsewhere used") ends with: "Workspace business bank accounts can be connected in USD, CAD, GBP, EUR, or AUD." This omits SGD, which is listed as a supported currency earlier in the article. This creates a contradiction within the same document.

5. Minor whitespace issue: The bullet list under "ACH reimbursement timelines" has a leading space before the dash on both items ( - **Rapid Reimbursement:**). While this may render correctly in most Markdown parsers, it is inconsistent with the formatting elsewhere in the article.

Positive aspects:

• The article structure logically progresses from concepts to actions to timelines to FAQ, which matches how a Workspace Admin would consume this information.
• Excellent cross-linking to related articles (report statuses, bank account setup, global reimbursement setup, and all six currency-specific guides).
• The keyword list in the YAML front matter directly addresses the thin search results cited in the PR description (SGD, global reimbursement, direct reimbursement, check payment concepts).
• The internalScope field is well-formed with clear audience, coverage, and exclusions.
• Step-by-step instructions for both single and bulk payment flows are clear, numbered correctly, and include both web and mobile navigation context.
• The Rapid Reimbursement eligibility criteria are specific and actionable (under $100, under $10,000 in 24 hours).

Recommendations

1. [Must fix] Change # Global Reimbursement timelines to ## Global Reimbursement timelines to maintain consistent heading hierarchy.
2. [Must fix] Fix the double-dash typo in the Singapore link (Global-Reimbursement--Singapore to Global-Reimbursement-Singapore) and confirm the target file exists or will be created.
3. [Must fix] Add question marks to all FAQ headings.
4. [Must fix] Add SGD to the currency list in the final FAQ answer, or remove the trailing paragraph from that FAQ entry since it partially duplicates earlier content.
5. [Should fix] Remove the leading space before the dashes in the ACH reimbursement timelines bullet list for consistent formatting.
6. [Consider] In the intro paragraph under "Reimbursement payment methods," consider briefly clarifying that ACH and global reimbursement are both forms of direct reimbursement to make the two-method framing immediately clear.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/wallet-and-payments/Reimbursement-Payment-Methods.md (new file, 143 lines) -- Strong foundational article with a few structural issues to resolve before merge.

Review based on the proposed diff only. Compared against existing HelpDot articles in the same directory for style and convention benchmarking.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 4bff5f75c0

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".

[melvin-bot]

Concierge reviewer checklist:

• I have verified the accuracy of the article
  • The article is within a hub that makes sense, and the navigation is correct
  • All processes, screenshots, and examples align with current product behavior.
  • All links within the doc have been verified for correct destination and functionality.
• I have verified the readability of the article
  • The article's language is clear, concise, and free of jargon.
  • The grammar, spelling, and punctuation are correct.
  • The article contains at least one image, or that an image is not necessary
• I have verified the formatting of the article
  • The article has consistent formatting (headings, bullet points, etc.) with other HelpDot articles and that aligns with the HelpDot formatting standards.
  • The article has proper text spacing and breaks for readability.
• I have verified the article has the appropriate tone and style
  • The article's tone is professional, friendly, and suitable for the target audience.
  • The article's tone, terminology, and voice are consistent throughout.
• I have verified the overall quality of the article
  • The article is not missing any information, nor does it contain redundant information.
  • The article fully addresses user needs.
• I have verified that all requested improvements have been addressed

For more detailed instructions on completing this checklist, see How do I review a HelpDot PR as a Concierge Team member?

cc @RachCHopkins

[melvin-bot]

@RachCHopkins 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]

[RachCHopkins]

LGTM!

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/RachCHopkins in version: 9.3.26-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.3.26-8 🚀

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