perf: extract components from IOURequestStepConfirmation

[OlimpiaZurek]

Explanation of Change

IOURequestStepConfirmation was a 1,742-line monolith with 25 useOnyx subscriptions (including 2 full-collection subs), 9 useEffect hooks handling unrelated concerns, and 8 useCallback hooks. Two full-collection subscriptions (COLLECTION.REPORT_DRAFT and COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS) caused the entire 18-component render tree to re-render on any change to any report draft or transaction violation app-wide.

This PR:

• Removes COLLECTION.REPORT_DRAFT full-collection subscription — getReportOrDraftReport already falls back to its module-level Onyx connection, so the component-level subscription was redundant and causing unnecessary re-renders on every draft change across the app.
• Decouples COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS from callback dependency arrays via ref — Previously, every violation change recreated all 7 submission callbacks, triggering prop updates to MoneyRequestConfirmationList. Now callbacks read violations from a ref at call time, breaking the cascade.
• Extracts 5 renderless components to isolate unrelated side effects from the main component.

Result: Create Expense flow

🟢 Duration Diff: -299.000 ms (-8.7%)
🟢 Commit Count Diff: -19

Result: Submit to Search
🟢 Duration Diff: -118.400 ms (-5.9%)
🟢 Commit Count Diff: -3

Fixed Issues

$ #86986, #81849

Tests

1. Create a manual expense from the global FAB → verify confirmation screen renders correctly and submission works
2. Create a scan expense with receipt → verify receipt loads on confirmation, SmartScan fields appear
3. Create a split expense with multiple participants → verify confirmation and split submission
4. Create an invoice → verify send invoice flow completes
5. Create a track expense with and without receipt → verify track flow
6. Create a per diem expense → verify per diem submission
7. Create a GPS distance request → verify location permission modal appears and geolocation works
8. Create an odometer distance request → verify image stitching produces receipt
9. Create multiple receipts via multi-scan → verify prev/next buttons switch transactions
10. On a policy workspace expense chat, create an expense → verify billable/reimbursable defaults are set correctly per policy config
11. Create an expense, change participant to one without categories → verify category resets to last saved value
12. Create a distance request → verify default distance category is applied
13. Open the app, tap global FAB → create expense → verify startMoneyRequest initializes (no blank confirmation page)

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."
same as tests

• 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 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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...es/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx	56.46% <100.00%> (+1.59%)	⬆️
...request/step/confirmation/DraftWorkspaceOpener.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...equest/step/confirmation/ExpenseDefaultsSetter.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...request/step/confirmation/TelemetrySpanManager.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...quest/step/confirmation/CategoryDefaultsSetter.tsx	84.21% <84.21%> (ø)
...uest/step/confirmation/MoneyRequestInitializer.tsx	66.66% <66.66%> (ø)
...uest/step/confirmation/OdometerReceiptStitcher.tsx	30.76% <30.76%> (ø)
...request/step/confirmation/ReceiptFileValidator.tsx	53.19% <53.19%> (ø)
... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@grgia 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]

[joekaufmanexpensify]

No product review needed

[grgia]

@OlimpiaZurek is there an issue or proposal for this change?

[OlimpiaZurek]

@OlimpiaZurek is there an issue or proposal for this change?

Hey @grgia! This is part of this issue: #81849. Here are the relevant comments: #81849 (comment) and #81849 (comment). Maybe it would be better to create a sub-issue for this effort, as there will be a few PRs here?
cc: @marcaaron

[Julesssss]

Looking good. As for breaking down the issues, I created these two for what i believe to be the sub-tasks. Please LMK if I am missing anything:

• #86986
• #86987

[Julesssss]

Minor conflicts now unfortunately

[ShridharGoel]

Reviewer Checklist

• I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
• I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
  • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
  • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
  • I verified the steps cover any possible 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 checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
• I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: HybridApp
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: HybridApp
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
• I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• I verified proper code patterns were followed (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
  • 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 verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
• 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
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
  • The file is named correctly
  • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
  • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
  • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
  • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
  • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
  • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
• 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.
• For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.1.09.57.AM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.1.13.33.AM.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.1.04.36.AM.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.1.14.05.AM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.12.42.38.AM.mov

[Julesssss]

Hi @OlimpiaZurek, some conflicts here too. PR looks good to me, @cristipaval can hopefully give a final review tomorrow

[OlimpiaZurek]

Hi @OlimpiaZurek, some conflicts here too. PR looks good to me, @cristipaval can hopefully give a final review tomorrow

Hey! All conflicts resolved.

[github-actions]

🚧 @cristipaval 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 #86865.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-24db80a-0782891-4f3f2977fa327ce6748d0ede9e9fcf934085ea5c/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-24db80a-0782891-df9a602a47dbfe251c0f9ba77242b071265d5fe5/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://86865.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[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.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.3.55-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS

[MelvinBot]

I reviewed the changes in this PR. No help site updates are required.

This PR is a pure internal performance refactoring of IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx — it extracts renderless components, removes a redundant Onyx subscription, and decouples callback dependencies to reduce re-renders. No user-facing behavior, UI labels, feature names, settings, or flows were changed.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.3.57-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS

[MelvinBot]

No help site changes required.

This PR is a pure performance/code-structure refactoring of IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx. It extracts renderless components and optimizes Onyx subscriptions to reduce re-renders. No user-facing behavior, UI text, navigation flows, feature names, or settings labels were added or changed — so no updates to App/docs/articles are needed.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.3.57-1 🚀

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

[FitseTLT]

@OlimpiaZurek Can u pls explain the purpose of this ignore? Because now the failure of reading receipt file on page refresh which setMoneyRequestReceipt to empty string is changing transaction (which is the dependency of the effect) and retriggering the effect before the promise is resolved so redirection is not working I want to make sure if it is safe to remove this ignore logic.

[OlimpiaZurek]

Hey @FitseTLT The ignore flag follows our PERF-15 pattern (clean up async Effects to prevent race conditions), it prevents a resolved promise from acting on stale data when the effect re-fires before the previous run settles. Removing it would fix the issue you mention, but it could introduce a race condition. I think the proper fix is to break the dependency cycle: avoid mutating transactions from inside the effect, or move that side-effect behind a ref so it doesn't retrigger the effect.