fix: address bulk duplicate expense follow-ups

[Krishna2323]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #87609
$ #87598
$ #87597
$ #87663
$ #87634
$ #87604
PROPOSAL:

Tests

#87609 — Selection mode consistency after bulk duplicate

Precondition: Account has at least one workspace.

1. Go to workspace chat.
2. Create two expenses.
3. Open the report.
4. Bulk select all expenses.
5. Tap dropdown button > Duplicate expenses.
6. Verify: Selection mode remains active (expenses deselected, but selection mode UI stays).
7. Go to Reports > Expenses.
8. Bulk select the same expenses.
9. Tap dropdown button > Duplicate expenses.
10. Verify: Selection mode remains active here too — behavior matches Step 6.

---

#87598 — Offline bulk duplicate creates only one report

Precondition: Account has at least one workspace with delayed submissions and approvals enabled.

1. Open workspace chat.
2. Create two different manual expenses.
3. Open the just created report.
4. Click Submit.
5. Turn off internet connection.
6. Select both expenses.
7. Click dropdown menu > Duplicate Expenses.
8. Return to chat.
9. Verify: Only one new report is created containing both duplicate expenses (not two).
10. Turn on internet connection.
11. Verify: The single report persists — no report disappears.

---

#87597 — Unreported per diem cannot be bulk duplicated

Precondition: Workspace has per diem rates configured.

1. Go to Self DM.
2. Create a per diem expense.
3. Go to Reports > Expenses.
4. Select the unreported per diem expense via checkbox.
5. Verify: The Duplicate expense option is not shown in the dropdown menu — matching the single-expense behavior from Self DM.

---

#87663 — Unreported distance expense cannot be bulk duplicated

Precondition: Account has Self DM and a workspace.

1. Navigate to Self DM.
2. Create a map distance expense.
3. Go to Reports > Expenses.
4. Select the unreported distance expense via checkbox.
5. Verify: The Duplicate expense option is not shown in the dropdown menu — matching the single-expense behavior from Self DM (which shows "You can't duplicate expenses across workspaces" modal).

---

#87634 — Offline bulk duplicate shows correct total for 3+ expenses

Precondition: Account has at least one workspace with delayed submissions and approvals enabled.

1. Open workspace chat.
2. Create three different manual expenses (e.g. $10, $20, $30).
3. Open the just created report.
4. Click Submit.
5. Turn off internet connection.
6. Select all three expenses.
7. Click dropdown menu > Duplicate Expenses.
8. Return to chat.
9. Verify: The new report shows the correct total ($60), not a partial amount.
10. Turn on internet connection.
11. Verify: The total remains correct after syncing.

---

#87604 — Bulk duplicate capped at 50 expenses

Precondition: Account has more than 50 expenses.

1. Go to Reports > Expenses.
2. Select more than 50 expenses.
3. Click dropdown menu > Duplicate Expenses.
4. Verify: A modal appears with the title "Duplicate expense" explaining that you can duplicate up to 50 expenses at a time.
5. Click Got it.
6. Verify: Modal dismisses. No duplication occurs.
7. Deselect some expenses so 50 or fewer are selected.
8. Click dropdown menu > Duplicate Expenses.
9. Verify: Expenses are duplicated successfully without any freeze or modal.

---

Repeat #87604 on report details page

1. Open a report with more than 50 expenses.
2. Bulk select all expenses.
3. Tap dropdown button > Duplicate Expenses.
4. Verify: Same modal appears explaining the 50-expense limit.
5. Deselect down to 50 or fewer.
6. Tap dropdown button > Duplicate Expenses.
7. Verify: Expenses are duplicated successfully.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

• Same as Tests

QA Steps

• 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
  • 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 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

fix_87609_selection_mode_inconsistency.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

fix_87597_unreported_distance.mp4

fix_87597_unreported_per_diem.mp4

fix_87598_two_previews.mp4

fix_87604_cap_50_expenses_dupe.mp4

fix_87634_incorrect_total_2.mp4

fix_87634_incorrect_total.mp4

[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

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/CONST/index.ts	92.30% <ø> (ø)
src/hooks/useBulkDuplicateAction.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts	42.17% <100.00%> (+0.93%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/Duplicate.ts	95.43% <100.00%> (+7.40%)	⬆️
src/hooks/useSelectedTransactionsActions.ts	75.90% <28.57%> (-0.84%)	⬇️
... and 14 files with indirect coverage changes

[Krishna2323]

@codex review

[Krishna2323]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

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".

[Krishna2323]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work!

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]

@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]

[Krishna2323]

@situchan @JS00001 ready for review.

[Krishna2323]

@codex review.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work!

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".

[MelvinBot]

🤖 Code Review — PR #87697

Overall this looks solid. The core changes are correct and well-tested. A few notes:

What's good:

• The existingIOUReport + sharedReportPreviewActionID approach in bulkDuplicateExpenses correctly solves the stale-Onyx-state race that caused multiple IOU reports offline. This mirrors the existing pattern in duplicateReport.
• Per diem validation now correctly blocks duplication when policyID is absent (not just mismatched), fixing the unreported per diem edge case.
• The unreported distance expense guard (UNREPORTED_REPORT_ID && activePolicyExpenseChat) is consistent with the cross-workspace distance restriction in duplicateReport.
• Good test coverage across all the new behaviors.

Minor observations:

1. submitPerDiemExpense return type — duplicateExpenseTransaction returns the result of createExpenseByType, which can dispatch to submitPerDiemExpense. If that path doesn't return {iouReport}, the optimisticIOUReport wouldn't be captured for subsequent iterations when bulk-duplicating per diem expenses, potentially re-introducing the multiple-report bug for that expense type. Worth verifying this path also returns iouReport.

2. BULK_DUPLICATE_LIMIT placement — The constant is under CONST.SEARCH but the limit also applies in useSelectedTransactionsActions (report-level selection, not search). Consider whether CONST.IOU or a shared location would be more discoverable, though this is purely organizational.

3. clearSelectedTransactions() behavioral change — The switch from (undefined, true) to () means selection mode stays active after bulk duplicate. This matches the behavior in useBulkDuplicateAction and aligns with the [Due for payment 2026-04-30] Expense - Selection mode inconsistency after bulk duplicating expenses on Inbox and Reports #87609 test plan, so it's intentional — just flagging for reviewer awareness.

No blocking issues found.

[situchan]

Please fix conflict

[Krishna2323]

conflicts resolved

[situchan]

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
  • MacOS: Desktop
• 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[Krishna2323]

@situchan bump

[situchan]

Please pull main.

[situchan]

Screenshots/Videos

87597.mov

87598.mov

87604.mov

87609.mov

87634.mov

87663.mov

[JS00001]

Lets keep an eye out for any more blockers 🙇🏻

[github-actions]

🚧 @JS00001 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 #87697.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-7c6e4e8-08b118a-43f34e286f96e608f87216e842a0d11c7a88c9c1/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-7c6e4e8-08b118a-baaedaf7ff6a2fd5dc1a5f82542e0e43c9541b84/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://87697.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.3.61-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS

[MelvinBot]

I reviewed the changes in this PR and found one documentation update is needed for Expensify's help site.

What changed that affects docs: This PR introduces a 50-expense limit for bulk duplication (with a modal warning when exceeded). The existing help article "How to Duplicate an Expense" did not mention this limit.

What doesn't need doc changes: The other fixes (offline single-report creation, unreported per diem/distance restrictions, selection mode behavior, production gate removal) are bug fixes or implementation refinements that don't change documented user workflows.

Draft PR created: #88407

Changes made:

• Added a note in the "How to duplicate multiple expenses at once" section about the 50-expense limit
• Added a new FAQ entry: "Is there a limit on how many expenses I can duplicate at once?"

Note: I was unable to add the PR to GitHub project 196 due to token permission restrictions. Please add it manually.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 9.3.61-4 🚀

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