Fix: Duplicate review tax code page shows no options across workspaces #81079

MobileMage · 2026-01-31T00:57:57Z

Explanation of Change

When reviewing duplicate expenses that span two workspaces with different feature configurations (e.g., Workspace A has taxes/categories/tags enabled, Workspace B does not), the review flow had multiple failures:

Tax code page showed no options — ReviewTaxCode.tsx line 27 used reviewDuplicates?.reportID as a fallback, loading the kept transaction's report instead of the thread report. This caused all downstream data (transaction, violations, duplicate IDs) to be derived from the wrong source.
Tax names resolved to NOT_FOUND — After fixing the report lookup, policy was still derived from the thread report's workspace (which may not have taxes enabled). Tax lookups (getTaxByID, getDefaultTaxCode, getTaxValue) need to use the kept transaction's workspace policy.
Category/tag review steps skipped & "It's not here" on Confirmation — The kept transaction's violation data may list an incomplete subset of duplicates (cross-workspace duplicates aren't always in every transaction's violation data). TransactionPreview now also loads the thread transaction's duplicate list and merges both lists before calling getReviewNavigationRoute, ensuring all duplicates are represented.

Changes:

ReviewTaxCode.tsx: Use route.params.threadReportID directly (consistent with all other review pages). Move usePolicy to derive from reviewDuplicatesReport?.policyID (the kept transaction's workspace) instead of the thread report's workspace.
TransactionPreview/index.tsx: Load the thread transaction's duplicate list via its violations and merge with the kept transaction's duplicates in the navigation callback, ensuring complete cross-workspace coverage.

Fixed Issues

$ #80476
PROPOSAL: #80476 (comment)

Tests

Preconditions:

Workspace A with taxes, categories, and tags enabled
Workspace B with taxes, categories, and tags not enabled
Three duplicate expenses: A1 (WS-A, no category/tag), A2 (WS-A, with category/tag/tax), B (WS-B, no category/tag/tax)

Open the duplicate transaction thread from WS-A
Click "Keep this one" on A2 (the one with category, tag, and tax)
Verify the review flow shows Category → Tag → Tax Code → Confirmation steps
Verify tax code names resolve correctly (not NOT_FOUND or empty)
Verify the Confirmation page renders correctly (no "It's not here" error)
Go back and click "Keep this one" on B (the WS-B transaction)
Verify the review flow skips category/tag/tax steps and goes straight to Confirmation
Open the duplicate transaction thread from WS-B
Click "Keep this one" on A2
Verify the review flow shows Category → Tag → Tax Code → Confirmation steps
Click "Keep this one" on B
Verify the review flow skips to Confirmation (WS-B has no features enabled)

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

The duplicate review flow requires online connectivity to load transaction violations and policy data. No offline-specific changes were made.

QA Steps

Same as tests above. Ensure two workspaces exist with different feature configurations (one with taxes/categories/tags enabled, one without) and three duplicate transactions spanning both workspaces.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

melvin-bot · 2026-01-31T00:58:03Z

@hungvu193 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]

Use threadReportID directly in ReviewTaxCode (consistent with other review pages) and derive the policy from the kept transaction's workspace for correct tax lookups. Merge thread transaction's duplicate list in TransactionPreview to ensure cross-workspace duplicates are fully represented in the review flow.

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 6f1ece5e97

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".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-01-31T01:06:57Z

src/components/ReportActionItem/TransactionPreview/index.tsx

    const navigateToReviewFields = useCallback(() => {
-        Navigation.navigate(getReviewNavigationRoute(Navigation.getActiveRoute(), route.params?.threadReportID, transaction, duplicates, policyCategories, transactionReport));
-    }, [route.params?.threadReportID, transaction, duplicates, policyCategories, transactionReport]);
+        const allDups = [...duplicates, ...(threadDupTxns ?? [])];


Filter thread duplicates before merging

duplicates has already been filtered with removeSettledAndApprovedTransactions, but threadDupTxns is appended without that filter. If the thread transaction’s violations include a duplicate that is settled/approved (e.g., one duplicate was already approved), allDups will reintroduce it and getReviewNavigationRoute will store it in reviewDuplicates.duplicates. That can cause the review flow to consider non‑reviewable transactions and pass settled/approved IDs into the merge params. Consider filtering/deduping threadDupTxns (or the merged list) the same way before navigation.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

codecov · 2026-01-31T01:14:20Z

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
...ents/ReportActionItem/TransactionPreview/index.tsx	`81.81% <66.66%> (-1.52%)`	⬇️
src/pages/TransactionDuplicate/ReviewTaxCode.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 120 files with indirect coverage changes

hungvu193

Is this PR ready for review? Could you complete the author checklist please? 👀

hungvu193 · 2026-02-01T10:03:18Z

src/components/ReportActionItem/TransactionPreview/index.tsx

+    const threadReport = allReports?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${route.params?.threadReportID}`];
+    const threadViolations = useTransactionViolations(getTransactionID(threadReport));
+    const [threadDuplicates] = useTransactionsByID(
+        useMemo(() => threadViolations?.find((v) => v.name === CONST.VIOLATIONS.DUPLICATED_TRANSACTION)?.data?.duplicates ?? [], [threadViolations]),


I think this file is compiled with react-compiler, we might not need the useMemo here.

hungvu193 · 2026-02-01T10:05:12Z

src/components/ReportActionItem/TransactionPreview/index.tsx

    const personalDetails = usePersonalDetails();

+    // Load thread transaction's complete duplicate list for cross-workspace comparison
+    const threadReport = allReports?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${route.params?.threadReportID}`];


Suggested change

const threadReport = allReports?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${route.params?.threadReportID}`];

const threadReport = allReports?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${getNonEmptyStringOnyxID(route.params?.threadReportID)}`];

hungvu193 · 2026-02-01T10:05:48Z

src/pages/TransactionDuplicate/ReviewTaxCode.tsx

    const [reviewDuplicates] = useOnyx(ONYXKEYS.REVIEW_DUPLICATES, {canBeMissing: true});
-    const [report] = useOnyx(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${reviewDuplicates?.reportID ?? route.params.threadReportID}`, {canBeMissing: true});
-    const policy = usePolicy(report?.policyID);
+    const [report] = useOnyx(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${route.params.threadReportID}`, {canBeMissing: true});


Suggested change

const [report] = useOnyx(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${route.params.threadReportID}`, {canBeMissing: true});

const [report] = useOnyx(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${getNonEmptyStringOnyxID(route.params.threadReportID)}`, {canBeMissing: true});

MobileMage requested review from a team as code owners January 31, 2026 00:57

melvin-bot bot assigned MobileMage Jan 31, 2026

melvin-bot bot requested review from hungvu193 and trjExpensify and removed request for a team January 31, 2026 00:58

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team January 31, 2026 00:58

MobileMage force-pushed the fix/80476-review-tax-code-report-id branch from 6f1ece5 to f907dc9 Compare January 31, 2026 01:00

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Jan 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

hungvu193 suggested changes Feb 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix: Duplicate review tax code page shows no options across workspaces #81079

Fix: Duplicate review tax code page shows no options across workspaces #81079

MobileMage commented Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 31, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

Uh oh!

hungvu193 left a comment

Uh oh!

hungvu193 Feb 1, 2026

Uh oh!

hungvu193 Feb 1, 2026

Uh oh!

hungvu193 Feb 1, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

	const threadReport = allReports?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${route.params?.threadReportID}`];
	const threadReport = allReports?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${getNonEmptyStringOnyxID(route.params?.threadReportID)}`];

	const [report] = useOnyx(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${route.params.threadReportID}`, {canBeMissing: true});
	const [report] = useOnyx(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${getNonEmptyStringOnyxID(route.params.threadReportID)}`, {canBeMissing: true});

Fix: Duplicate review tax code page shows no options across workspaces #81079

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Fix: Duplicate review tax code page shows no options across workspaces #81079

Conversation

MobileMage commented Jan 31, 2026

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Jan 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 31, 2026 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

hungvu193 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hungvu193 Feb 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hungvu193 Feb 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hungvu193 Feb 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

codecov bot commented Jan 31, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading