Add Cancel payment action for pending P2P wallet payments

[KioCoan]

Explanation of Change

This adds a Cancel payment secondary action (report header "More" menu) for the sender of a peer-to-peer "send money" payment that was made with the Expensify Wallet and is waiting for the receiver to set up their wallet. While the payment is held, the sender can cancel it, which returns the held funds.

Note: this relies on the companion backend change (Auth CancelReimbursement) so the user-initiated cancel actually returns the held wallet funds.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/629371

Tests

1. As User A (with an activated Expensify Wallet), use Send money to pay User B, who has not set up a wallet yet, choosing Expensify Wallet as the payment method.
2. Open the resulting payment (IOU) report as User A.
3. Open the report header More menu.
4. Verify a Cancel payment option is shown.
5. Tap Cancel payment and confirm in the modal.
6. Verify the report moves to the cancelled state, the held funds are returned, and Cancel payment no longer appears.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

1. As User A (with an activated Expensify Wallet), use Send money to pay User B, who has not set up a wallet yet, choosing Expensify Wallet as the payment method.
2. Open the resulting payment (IOU) report as User A.
3. Open the report header More menu.
4. Verify a Cancel payment option is shown.
5. Tap Cancel payment and confirm in the modal.
6. Verify the report moves to the cancelled state, the held funds are returned, and Cancel payment no longer appears.

• 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 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 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)
• 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.
• 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

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts	95.52% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/PayMoneyRequest.ts	82.48% <100.00%> (+0.93%)	⬆️
... and 1063 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@Pujan92 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]

[trjExpensify]

What's the hold up here? Looks like that Auth PR has been waiting for a review for a couple of weeks. CC: @danieldoglas

[danieldoglas]

I was involved in a few fires in the last weeks, so I missed reviewing the auth PR. Doing so now.

[Pujan92]

@KioCoan plz merge main and fix the conflicts

[KioCoan]

@Pujan92 done.

[trjExpensify]

Cool, makes sense that we need to add this. 👍

[KioCoan]

Friendly bump @Pujan92

[Pujan92]

@KioCoan I am getting an error "Cannot mix test and non-test wallets in a payment." for sendMoneyWithWallet api

[KioCoan]

@KioCoan I am getting an error "Cannot mix test and non-test wallets in a payment." for sendMoneyWithWallet api

That error isn't coming from this PR. PayWithWallet has a guard that rejects a payment when one wallet is a test wallet and the other isn't, and it's been there since last year. Your payer wallet is a test wallet (activated with the Alberta Charleson test PII, which swaps in the test wallet account number), and the receiver in this flow has to be someone who never set up a wallet, so their wallet can never be a test wallet. That combination always throws, which means the held payment state can't be created on staging at all.

Making the payer a non-test wallet would need real KYC and real funds, so this one isn't testable on staging. Here's what I'd suggest instead:

1. I ran the full flow locally against dev, sending money with the wallet to someone who hasn't set theirs up and then cancelling. Evidence below: the held wallet reimbursement row exists while the payment is waiting, it's deleted after the cancel so nothing debits the payer's wallet, and Auth pushes back isWaitingOnBankAccount: null, isCancelledIOU: true and a REIMBURSEMENTDEQUEUED action, which is exactly what the App's optimistic data expects. isIntegrationTest wasn't used, so that's the normal production path.
2. For the App side you can still verify the gating on staging: pay someone with the wallet, then turn on Debug mode (Settings > Troubleshoot > Debug mode), open the IOU report's debug page and set isWaitingOnBankAccount to true. Cancel payment should show up in the More menu for the sender only, and confirming should fire CancelPayment. The backend half is covered by CancelReimbursementTest in the Auth PR.

Do you know if we would need an internal QA for this @danieldoglas?