Skip to content

Add billing restriction guard to duplicate expense handlers#88363

Draft
MelvinBot wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
claude-duplicateExpenseRestrictBillableActions
Draft

Add billing restriction guard to duplicate expense handlers#88363
MelvinBot wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
claude-duplicateExpenseRestrictBillableActions

Conversation

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@MelvinBot MelvinBot commented Apr 20, 2026

Explanation of Change

The duplicate expense flow never checks whether the target workspace has expired billing. When a user duplicates an expense, the target workspace is selected via useDefaultExpensePolicy → isPolicyAccessible, which only verifies the policy exists and the user has a role — it does not check billing/expiration status.

This adds the same shouldRestrictUserBillableActions guard that already exists in the Add Expense handler to all duplicate expense entry points:

  • useExpenseActions.ts: DUPLICATE_EXPENSE and DUPLICATE_REPORT handlers
  • MoneyRequestHeaderSecondaryActions.tsx: Transaction-level DUPLICATE handler
  • useSearchBulkActions.ts: Bulk DUPLICATE handler (both deleted-transactions and normal contexts)

When the target policy has restricted billable actions, the user is now navigated to ROUTES.RESTRICTED_ACTION instead of proceeding with the duplication — consistent with the existing Add Expense behavior.

Fixed Issues

$ #84368
PROPOSAL: #84368 (comment)

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review"
// Please describe what tests you performed that validates your changed worked.

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the offline tests before marking this PR as "ready for review"

QA Steps

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

  • 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 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

@MelvinBot @eVoloshchak
Add shouldRestrictUserBillableActions guard to duplicate expense hand…
0f3fb24 
…lers

The duplicate expense flow never checks whether the target workspace has
expired billing. This allows users to bypass the billing restriction by
duplicating expenses into expired workspaces. Add the same
shouldRestrictUserBillableActions guard that exists in the Add Expense
handler to all duplicate expense entry points:

- useExpenseActions: DUPLICATE_EXPENSE and DUPLICATE_REPORT handlers
- MoneyRequestHeaderSecondaryActions: transaction-level DUPLICATE handler
- useSearchBulkActions: bulk DUPLICATE handler (both contexts)

Co-authored-by: Eugene Voloshchak <[email protected]>
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from a team April 20, 2026 22:14
@MelvinBot MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Apr 20, 2026
Open
7 tasks
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov bot commented Apr 20, 2026 •
edited by github-actions bot
Loading

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
.../components/MoneyRequestHeaderSecondaryActions.tsx 1.01% <0.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
src/hooks/useExpenseActions.ts 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts 42.28% <25.00%> (-0.34%) ⬇️
... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

@eVoloshchak eVoloshchak

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@MelvinBot @eVoloshchak