Fix Create Report row showing wrong workspace name when moving expenses

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

The "Create report" row in the move-to-report flow (IOURequestEditReport) was displaying the source workspace name instead of the default workspace name. This happened because IOURequestEditReportCommon independently derived the display policy from selectedReport?.policyID, overriding what the caller intended.

The fix moves the responsibility of deciding which policyID to display to each caller via the transactionPolicyID prop:

• IOURequestEditReportCommon.tsx: Removed the selectedReport?.policyID fallback from the usePolicyForMovingExpenses call — now uses only the caller-provided transactionPolicyID.
• IOURequestStepReport.tsx: Updated to explicitly pass selectedReport?.policyID ?? transactionPolicyID, preserving existing behavior.
• SearchTransactionsChangeReport.tsx: Added transactionPolicyID={selectedReportPolicyID} prop, preserving existing behavior.

When IOURequestEditReport does not pass transactionPolicyID, the hook receives undefined and returns the user's default workspace — matching the actual report creation behavior.

Fixed Issues

$ #84618
PROPOSAL: #84618 (comment)

Tests

1. Create 2 expenses on a non-default workspace
2. Open expense report, select any one expense
3. Click Selected > Move to report
4. Verify the "Create report" row displays the default workspace name (not the source workspace name)
5. Choose "Create report" and verify it creates the report in the default workspace
6. Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A — This change only affects which workspace name is displayed in the UI. The underlying data flow does not change.

QA Steps

1. Create 2 expenses on a non-default workspace
2. Open expense report, select any one expense
3. Click Selected > Move to report
4. Verify the "Create report" row displays the default workspace name (not the source workspace name)
5. Choose "Create report" and verify it creates the report in the default workspace

• 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

[MelvinBot]

I created this PR from an upstream branch since I don't have push access to your fork.

To take ownership of this branch and be able to push updates, run:

git remote add upstream https://github.com/Expensify/App.git
git fetch upstream claude-fixCreateReportWorkspaceDisplay
git checkout -b claude-fixCreateReportWorkspaceDisplay upstream/claude-fixCreateReportWorkspaceDisplay
git push -u origin claude-fixCreateReportWorkspaceDisplay

Then you can close this PR and open a new one from your fork.

[MelvinBot]

The failing check build (developmentDebug, false) is unrelated to this PR's changes.

Analysis: The Android build fails with:

Could not read script '.../node_modules/expo/scripts/autolinking.gradle' as it does not exist.

This is a build infrastructure issue with the expo autolinking gradle script not being present in node_modules.

Evidence: This PR only modifies 3 TypeScript UI files:

• src/pages/Search/SearchTransactionsChangeReport.tsx
• src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestEditReportCommon.tsx
• src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepReport.tsx

None of these files affect the Android build system, Gradle configuration, or expo autolinking. This appears to be a pre-existing or transient build environment issue.

[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
...rc/pages/Search/SearchTransactionsChangeReport.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...rc/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestEditReport.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...es/iou/request/step/IOURequestEditReportCommon.tsx	88.23% <ø> (-0.18%)	⬇️
...rc/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepReport.tsx	72.30% <100.00%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
... and 12 files with indirect coverage changes

[MelvinBot]

The failing checks are unrelated to this PR's changes.

Analysis:

• This PR only modifies 3 TypeScript files (IOURequestEditReportCommon.tsx, IOURequestStepReport.tsx, SearchTransactionsChangeReport.tsx)
• The Android build (developmentDebug) fails because node_modules/expo/scripts/autolinking.gradle doesn't exist — a build infrastructure/dependency issue
• The iOS build (DebugDevelopment) appears to hang/timeout during native pod compilation
• The same build workflow also failed on main with the same type of failures, confirming this is a pre-existing infrastructure issue

These builds should pass on a re-run or once the underlying infrastructure issue is resolved.

[jayeshmangwani]

@MelvinBot, looks like these changes caused a bug. Moving reports are being created in the same workspace instead of the Default workspace.

[MelvinBot]

Good catch! The original fix only updated the display in IOURequestEditReportCommon to show the default workspace, but missed updating the creation logic in IOURequestEditReport.

Root Cause: IOURequestEditReport.tsx line 60 was still passing selectedReport?.policyID (the source workspace) to its own usePolicyForMovingExpenses call. This meant:

• The "Create report" button displayed the default workspace name (correct after the original fix)
• But createReportForPolicy at line 121 used policyForMovingExpenses from this separate hook call, so the report was actually created in the source workspace

Fix pushed: Changed the usePolicyForMovingExpenses call in IOURequestEditReport.tsx to pass undefined instead of selectedReport?.policyID, so the hook falls back to the user's default workspace for both display and creation.

[MelvinBot]

The failing check (build (developmentDebug, false)) is unrelated to this PR's changes.

Analysis: The Android build failed with:

Could not read script '/home/runner/_work/App/App/node_modules/expo/scripts/autolinking.gradle' as it does not exist.

This is a build environment/dependency issue — the expo autolinking gradle script was not found in node_modules. This PR only modifies 4 TypeScript files (IOURequestEditReportCommon.tsx, IOURequestStepReport.tsx, IOURequestEditReport.tsx, SearchTransactionsChangeReport.tsx), none of which affect the Android build system or dependencies.

Evidence: The same Android build workflow (Remote Build Android) is passing on main, confirming this is a transient CI issue. Re-running the failed job should resolve it.

[MelvinBot]

The failing build checks are unrelated to this PR's changes.

Failing checks:

1. build (developmentDebug, false) — Android build fails with Could not read script 'node_modules/expo/scripts/autolinking.gradle' as it does not exist. This is a build infrastructure/dependency issue.
2. build (New Expensify Dev, DebugDevelopment, false) — iOS build is also failing consistently on main (confirmed by checking recent main branch runs).

Evidence:

• This PR only modifies 4 TypeScript files: IOURequestEditReportCommon.tsx, IOURequestStepReport.tsx, SearchTransactionsChangeReport.tsx, and IOURequestEditReport.tsx
• All code-related checks pass: ESLint, TypeScript, Prettier, all 8 test jobs, and storybook tests
• The Remote Build iOS workflow has been failing on every recent main push (runs 23370079973, 23366754471, 23365442692, etc.)

[jayeshmangwani]

@MelvinBot merge latest main.

[MelvinBot]

Done — merged latest main into this branch and pushed.

[MelvinBot]

The failing check build (New Expensify Dev, DebugDevelopment, false) is unrelated to this PR.

Analysis: This PR only modifies 4 TypeScript files (IOURequestEditReportCommon.tsx, IOURequestStepReport.tsx, IOURequestEditReport.tsx, SearchTransactionsChangeReport.tsx). The failing check is a native iOS xcodebuild step that compiles Swift/ObjC code — the build log shows no compilation errors in the PR's changed files. The xcodebuild fails with a generic RockError: Failed to build the project after a remote cache miss.

Evidence: The same Build and deploy apps for testing workflow has been consistently failing on main as well (5 consecutive failures on March 20), confirming this is a pre-existing infrastructure issue unrelated to this PR's changes.