refactor: align expense preview card metadata line with mobile row styling, fix scanning and split layouts

[Krishna2323]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #96475
$ #98221
$ #98206
$ #98329
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Base layout — #96475

1. Open Spend and note a mobile expense row: Merchant | Amount, then Date • Category | Cash/Card.
2. Open the same expense's preview card in chat/report preview — layout and muted second-line styling should match.
3. Check with and without a category (no empty • when category is missing).
4. Check Cash and Card types.
5. Spot-check pending, deleted (strikethrough), and RBR cases still look correct.
6. Verify Paid, Approved, and Review required no longer appear on the supporting line — the report status badge and the violation row already show them.
7. Cancel a payment on an expense report, then open the chat report preview — Canceled appears at the report level next to the expense count (e.g. [Approved] Canceled • 1 expense), not on the expense preview line.
8. Open the same cancelled expense from Search → Chats tab (a preview with no report header) — Canceled appears on the supporting line there, since nothing else on that surface reports it.

---

Scanning layout regression — #98221

1. Open any workspace chat.
2. Create a scan expense and submit it to the workspace chat.
3. While the expense is still scanning, check the preview card. Expected, matching Figma:
   • Receipt on top, small and muted, left aligned.
   • Scanning… directly below it, normal text size, left aligned.
   • No date, no category, and no amount while scanning.
4. Verify Scanning… is not right aligned and Receipt is not stacked underneath it.
5. Wait for the scan to finish — the card returns to the normal Merchant | Amount / Date • Category | Receipt rows.
6. Delete an expense while it is still scanning — it keeps the normal rows with the struck-through amount, not the scanning layout.

---

Split avatar placement regression — #98206

1. Open a 1:1 DM with any user.
2. Click + → Split expense → Manual, and split an expense with a merchant.
3. Check the split preview card. Expected, per shawnborton's mock:
   • Participant avatars on the bottom left, on the same row as Your split.
   • Your split amount stays on the right of that same row.
4. Verify the avatars are not rendered next to / trailing the merchant name on the first row.
5. Split an expense in a group chat with 3+ participants — the stacked avatars still overlap correctly and stay left aligned.
6. Split an expense where you are not a participant in the split (no "Your split" amount) — avatars still show bottom left, and the row does not collapse.

---

Hold message placement regression — #98329

1. Open any workspace chat and create a manual expense.
2. Right click the preview → Hold, enter a reason and hold the expense.
3. Expected: the red RBR row reads This expense was put on hold, and the supporting line still shows only Date • Category.
4. Verify the hold text is not repeated on the Date • Category line, and is not truncated.
5. Hold an expense that also has one violation (e.g. create an expense with no category in a workspace that requires categories, then hold it). Expected: Category missing • This expense was put on hold.
6. Hold an expense with two or more violations. Expected: Review required • This expense was put on hold.
7. Unhold the expense — the hold text disappears and any remaining violation message stays on its own.
8. Check a duplicate expense (create two identical expenses) — the duplicate RBR message is unchanged from main.
9. Check a settled/paid expense that was previously held — no hold text appears.
10. Check an expense with a receipt error (scan failure) while also held — both reasons still read correctly.
11. Go offline, hold an expense — the RBR row shows the same composite message with the pending style.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

1. Go offline, create a manual expense and a split expense — both previews keep the layouts above with the greyed-out pending style.

QA Steps

• Same as tests

• 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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

Monosnap.screencast.2026-08-17.15-05-48.mp4

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
.../MoneyRequestReportPreview/ReportPreviewHeader.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/styles/index.ts	63.00% <ø> (ø)
...m/TransactionPreview/TransactionPreviewContent.tsx	81.73% <95.00%> (+4.39%)	⬆️
src/libs/TransactionPreviewUtils.ts	85.92% <88.88%> (+0.40%)	⬆️
... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@situchan 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]

[Krishna2323]

• Fix for Report - "This expense was put on hold" is not completelly visible on report preview.
  

• 

• Fix for Report - "Receipt" is visible below "Scanning" on preview, with different size.

• 

• Fix for Split - Split participant avatars are shown next to merchant

• 

[shawnborton]

For the split case, we might need to shift the avatars over slightly as I think the border is being counted as part of their left edge:

Otherwise this is looking good 👍 thanks for the follow ups!

[mountiny]

@situchan do you have ETA for a review here? thanks

[Krishna2323]

For the split case, we might need to shift the avatars over slightly as I think the border is being counted as part of their left edge:

@shawnborton updated:

[shawnborton]

Thanks!

[situchan]

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 that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
• I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: HybridApp
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: HybridApp
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• 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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

hold.mov

scan1.mov

scan2.mov

split.mov

[situchan]

Hold + single/multiple violations are inconsistent with mobile row

• Single violation
  • preview: Missing tag • The expense was put on hold
  • mobile: The expense was put on hold. Missing tag.
• Multiple violations
  • preview: Review required • The expense was put on hold
  • mobile: The expense was put on hold. Missing category. Missing tag.

[situchan]

While the categorized expense is still scanning, is it expected to hide category (and date)?

production:

[situchan]

Looks like both concerns were already design approved #98758 (comment)

[github-actions]

🚧 JS00001 has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #98758.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-0f5a2b3-3d1e22c-202eb6d8bd20745903aceb735704963827ece822/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-0f5a2b3-3d1e22c-55559c66e5c67c06a152304928028a52a7a21008/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://98758.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[shawnborton]

Hmm good catch on the category, if we have it, I think it's worth showing it in that Scanning view personally.

Maybe something more like this?

[Krishna2323]

@shawnborton PR is up: #98976

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.4.57-0 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

[MelvinBot]

🤖 I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site articles in docs/articles.

No help site changes are required.

This PR is a visual/layout-only refactor of the expense preview card. It does not add or change any user-facing feature, workflow, copy, or setting that the help site documents:

• Base layout — realigns the preview card's metadata line to match the mobile row styling (Merchant | Amount, then Date • Category | Cash/Card). Also moves the Canceled status to the report level next to the expense count.
• Scanning layout — fixes the scanning-state layout so Receipt sits above Scanning…, left aligned.
• Split avatar placement — moves split participant avatars to the bottom-left row alongside Your split.
• Hold message placement — appends the hold message to the RBR row instead of duplicating it on the Date • Category line.

All strings used are existing translation keys (iou.canceled, iou.yourSplit, violations.hold, etc.) — no new user-facing copy was introduced. The changes are confined to presentation components (TransactionPreviewContent.tsx, ReportPreviewHeader.tsx, TransactionPreviewUtils.ts, styles/index.ts) and their tests.

Help site articles (e.g. Split Expenses, Create an Expense, SmartScan) describe how these features work and how to use them, none of which changed here — so no article edits are needed and no draft PR was created.

If you believe a specific article should be updated to reflect any of these visual changes, let me know which one and I'll take another look.

---

view run

[lanitochka17]

Deploy Blocker #99093 was identified to be related to this PR.

[lanitochka17]

Deploy Blocker #99091 was identified to be related to this PR.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.4.57-3 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android