Use freshly computed report totals from backend instead of potentially stale stored total

[allgandalf]

Explanation of Change

Frontend follow-up to https://github.com/Expensify/Auth/pull/20630, which started returning freshly computed reimbursableTotal, unheldReimbursableTotal, nonReimbursableTotal, unheldNonReimbursableTotal, and unheldTotal on every report Onyx update.

The original bug is that report.total (the stored DB column) is sometimes stale and doesn't match the sum of the underlying transactions. Anywhere the App previously derived the user-facing reimbursable amount from total - nonReimbursableTotal would render the wrong value when the stored total was out of date.

This PR migrates the App to read the fresh fields directly:

• Type + whitelist: added reimbursableTotal and unheldReimbursableTotal to the Report Onyx type and the whitelisted report keys so they survive Onyx serialization.
• Display utilities:
  • getMoneyRequestSpendBreakdown now prefers reimbursableTotal over deriving it from total - nonReimbursableTotal. This is the primary fix for the bug — it's what MoneyReportView, MoneyRequestReportPreviewContent, search list items, and report previews all read.
  • getNonHeldAndFullAmount now prefers unheldReimbursableTotal for the held-aware reimbursable display used by approve/pay buttons.
  • populateOptimisticReportFormula uses the fresh reimbursableTotal field for the {report:reimbursable} template placeholder.
• Action sites: PayMoneyRequest (both pay-amount derivation and cancel-payment optimistic action), Search.ts payment-amount and bulk-selection paths, IOU/index.ts test-receipt path, and the PayActionCell and TransactionItemRow UI cells now read reimbursableTotal directly.
• Optimistic update sites: every place that writes total / unheldTotal / nonReimbursableTotal to Onyx during optimistic updates also writes reimbursableTotal / unheldReimbursableTotal so the local state doesn't drift between the optimistic write and the next server response. Covers buildOptimisticIOUReport, buildOptimisticExpenseReport, buildOptimisticEmptyReport, updateIOUOwnerAndTotal, IOU/index.ts policy expense chat path, PerDiem.ts, RejectMoneyRequest.ts, Duplicate.ts, Report/index.ts currency conversion path, and Transaction.ts cross-report transaction moves.

Every read also has a fallback to the legacy total - nonReimbursableTotal derivation so older locally cached reports without the fresh field still display correctly.

Fixed Issues

$ #80151
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

1. Sign in to a workspace with at least one expense report containing both reimbursable and non-reimbursable expenses.
2. Open the report in the LHN.
3. Verify the totals shown in MoneyReportView match the sum of the underlying expenses (reimbursable spend, non-reimbursable spend, total spend).
4. Add a new reimbursable expense; verify the displayed totals update correctly.
5. Add a non-reimbursable expense; verify the displayed totals update correctly.
6. Edit an existing expense's amount; verify the displayed totals update.
7. Toggle a reimbursable expense to non-reimbursable (and vice versa); verify the displayed totals update.
8. Place an expense on hold; verify the unheld total updates and the held expense is excluded.
9. Take the expense off hold; verify the unheld total returns to the full reimbursable total.
10. Search for reports and verify the amounts shown in the search list match the report totals.
11. Pay a report from the search list — verify the pay button shows the correct reimbursable amount.
12. Bulk-select multiple reports in search and verify the aggregated total in the bulk action UI matches the sum of reimbursable amounts.
13. Verify that no errors appear in the JS console.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

1. Go offline.
2. Add a new reimbursable expense to a report — verify the displayed totals update optimistically.
3. Toggle reimbursability on an existing expense — verify totals update optimistically.
4. Place an expense on hold offline — verify the unheld total updates optimistically.
5. Come back online and verify the totals reconcile against the server response without flickering or showing stale values.

QA Steps

Test 1:

1. Sign in to a workspace with at least one expense report containing both reimbursable and non-reimbursable expenses.
2. Open the report in the LHN.
3. Verify the totals shown in MoneyReportView match the sum of the underlying expenses.
4. Add reimbursable + non-reimbursable expenses and verify totals update.
5. Place an expense on hold and verify the unheld total excludes it.
6. Pay the report from the search results and verify the pay button shows the reimbursable amount.
7. Bulk-select reports in search and verify the aggregated total matches the sum of reimbursable amounts.
8. Verify that no errors appear in the JS console.

Test 2 (Check regression #91729) :

1. Go to workspace chat.
2. Create two expenses.
3. Open the report.
4. Open any expense.
5. Click More > Hold.
6. Enter reason and save it.
7. Go back to expense report.
8. Click Submit.
9. Go offline.
10. Click Approve.
11. Select the unheld amount.

Verify that, Pay button will show the unheld amount because the report now contains only pending amount.

• 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

[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
...ents/TransactionItemRow/TransactionItemRowWide.tsx	96.03% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/DebugUtils.ts	68.50% <100.00%> (+0.12%)	⬆️
src/libs/IOUUtils.ts	76.25% <100.00%> (+0.90%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/Duplicate.ts	91.64% <100.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/Hold.ts	93.83% <100.00%> (+0.08%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/PayMoneyRequest.ts	81.25% <100.00%> (-0.10%)	⬇️
src/libs/actions/IOU/RejectMoneyRequest.ts	77.83% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts	69.46% <100.00%> (+0.19%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/Transaction.ts	74.10% <100.00%> (+1.14%)	⬆️
src/types/utils/whitelistedReportKeys.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 9 more
... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes