Apply tax rule when selecting category

[bernhardoj]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #53220
PROPOSAL: #53220 (comment)

Tests

Same as QA Steps

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as QA Steps

QA Steps

Prerequisite:

1. Have a workspace with multiple categories and at least 2 tax rates (A & B) with different values (not including the default 0%)
2. Assign category A with tax rate A and category B with tax rate B

Manual:

1. Open workspace chat
2. Create a new money request with the category A
3. Open the transaction thread and verify the tax rate is the tax rate A
4. Edit the category to category B
5. Verify the tax rate changes to tax rate B

Split:
7. Go back to workspace chat
8. Create a manual split request with the category A/B
9. Press the split preview and verify the tax rate is the tax rate of the selected category
10. Create a scan split request with the category A
11. Press the split preview and verify the tax rate is the tax rate A
12. Change the category to B and verify the tax rate changes to tax rate B
13. Split the scan request
14. Press the split preview again and verify the tax rate is the tax rate B

Categorize:

1. Open self DM and create a new track expense
2. Choose Categorize it
3. Select category A/B
4. Verify the tax rate on the confirmation page is the tax rate of the selected category
5. If the workspace is not the workspace from prerequisite, go back and select the workspace
6. Categorize the expense
7. Verify the created expense has the selected tax rate from step 4

• 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 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.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android.mweb.mp4

iOS: Native

ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios.mweb.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@mollfpr 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]

[bernhardoj]

I think there is still 2 things to fix on the BE.

1. Updating the category. When updating the category, the tax rate is updated optimistically, but the response from the BE "revert" the update to the previous tax rate.
2. When categorizing track expense, the selected tax rate is saved, but not the amount.

categorize.mp4

The tax amount is passed to the API (the tax amount below is different from the video above because it's a different track expense I recorded above)

but the BE returns the tax amount as 0.

[MonilBhavsar]

Updating the category. When updating the category, the tax rate is updated optimistically, but the response from the BE "revert" the update to the previous tax rate.
When categorizing track expense, the selecte

This should be fixed soon

When categorizing track expense, the selected tax rate is saved, but not the amount.

Interesting, I'll take a look. Is it an existing bug?

[MonilBhavsar]

Updating the category. When updating the category, the tax rate is updated optimistically, but the response from the BE "revert" the update to the previous tax rate.

This is now on server. @bernhardoj could you please test and let me know

[bernhardoj]

Updating the category. When updating the category, the tax rate is updated optimistically, but the response from the BE "revert" the update to the previous tax rate.

This is now on server. @bernhardoj could you please test and let me know

Yes, it's fixed now.

When categorizing track expense, the selected tax rate is saved, but not the amount.

Interesting, I'll take a look. Is it an existing bug?

Looks like it's a new issue. I tested by selecting a category with the default tax rate (0%) and change the tax rate manually to 5% and it works.

[MonilBhavsar]

I tested by selecting a category with the default tax rate (0%) and change the tax rate manually to 5% and it works.

Could you please clarify steps in detail. I am not completely getting it

[bernhardoj]

I have a workspace A with categories A and B. Category A has a tax rate of 5%, while category B has the default tax rate, 0%.

This works fine:

1. Create a new track expense
2. Choose Categorize it
3. Choose category B
4. On the confirmation page, the tax rate is 0%
5. I change the tax rate to 5% and submit
6. The created expense shows the correct tax rate and amount

This doesn't work fine

1. Create a new track expense
2. Choose Categorize it
3. Choose category A
4. On the confirmation page, the tax rate is 5%
5. Submit
6. The created expense shows the correct tax rate, but the amount is 0

[MonilBhavsar]

Okay thanks! Going to test that case on your branch

[MonilBhavsar]

On step3: When I select a category that has tax rate of 5%, the tax percentage on confirmation page displays incorrect value - not the 5%

Sorry, I was on wrong version

[MonilBhavsar]

Okay reproduced the bug, thanks! Checking...

[MonilBhavsar]

@bernhardoj I noticed, it is because taxAmount is passed negative number when categorizing. Do you please mind updating here?

[bernhardoj]

@MonilBhavsar Ah, I got it now. Updated

[MonilBhavsar]

Thanks! @mollfpr this can be reviewed and tested now

[mollfpr]

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 tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • 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 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: Native

Manual

53332.-.Android.-.Manual.mp4

Split

53332.-.Android.-.Split.mp4

Categorize

53332.-.Android.-.Categorize.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

Manual

53332.-.mWeb-Chrome.-.Manual.mp4

Split

53332.-.mWeb-Chrome.-.Split.mp4

Categorize

53332.-.mWeb-Chrome.-.Categorize.mp4

iOS: Native

Manual
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0e91cbe6-e6c0-4b45-8639-e95038bcaa8d

Split
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/616842c4-f065-46af-ad36-d6c2ea31cd7d

Categorize
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/df2936c5-dff5-4d8b-ae25-0f73e7757840

iOS: mWeb Safari

Manual
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c55c4e5a-d01b-4d71-aeab-32c7145b0113

Split
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/fb4924bd-6568-423f-a616-e98b2b1d5183

Categorize
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7a314558-6a8e-46e5-afa3-5793cbd2a083

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Manual

53332.-.Web.-.Manual.mp4

Split

53332.-.Web.-.Split.mp4

Categorize

53332.-.Web.-.Categorize.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

Manual

53332.-.Desktop.-.Manual.mp4

Split

53332.-.Desktop.-.Split.mp4

Categorize

53332.-.Desktop.-.Categorize.mp4

[mollfpr]

LGTM!

[MonilBhavsar]

Thanks!

[MonilBhavsar]

@bernhardoj can we please add unit tests?

[bernhardoj]

@MonilBhavsar I was thinking about how we can test this and I realize we can only test this through a UI test and I feel there is something wrong with it because the logic to apply the tax rule is tied to the UI (the category page in this case).

What do you think of adding the tax rule to each function:

1. setMoneyRequestCategory
2. updateMoneyRequestCategory
3. setDraftSplitTransaction

This tax rule logic will be put on a function so it's reusable between those 3 functions.

This way, we untie the logic from the UI and we can test each function to verify that the tax is selected automatically when the rule is enabled.

[MonilBhavsar]

Like the idea of combining logic in a function, reusing and testing it

[bernhardoj]

@MonilBhavsar updated

[MonilBhavsar]

Some checks are failing.
@mollfpr if you please retest since we updated the logic

[mollfpr]

@MonilBhavsar Yup, retesting it now!

[mollfpr]

Test well 👍