Hide Pex from bank options until it's implemented in ND by carlosmiceli · Pull Request #82836 · Expensify/App

carlosmiceli · 2026-02-18T17:05:36Z

Explanation of Change

Hiding Pex until it's properly implemented.
Context: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1771415869720979?thread_ts=1771415601.716659&cid=C049HHMV9SM

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/601495
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Go to a workspace → Company cards → Add new cards → Who's your bank?
Verify Pex is no longer an option.

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 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

codecov · 2026-02-18T17:24:49Z

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...s/workspace/companyCards/addNew/SelectBankStep.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 69 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-02-18T17:53:33Z

@dominictb 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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: a27d35e994

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-02-18T18:00:09Z

src/pages/workspace/companyCards/addNew/SelectBankStep.tsx

+            if (bank === CONST.COMPANY_CARDS.BANKS.PEX) {
+                return false;


Clear hidden PEX selection before rendering bank list

Filtering PEX out of data here hides the row, but it does not clear bankSelected, which is sourced from persisted Onyx state. If a user had previously selected PEX (e.g., before this rollout) and lands on this step again, no option appears selected, yet submit() still treats bankSelected as valid and advances with PEX, so the unsupported flow remains reachable despite being hidden.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@MelvinBot implement this suggestion.

Implemented in d5ac28e. Added a useEffect that checks the persisted selectedBank from Onyx — if it's PEX, it clears the selection by calling setAddNewCompanyCardStepAndData({data: {selectedBank: null}}). This ensures users who previously selected PEX won't silently advance through the unsupported flow.

If a user had previously selected PEX before it was hidden, the persisted Onyx state would still hold PEX as the selected bank. This allowed advancing through the unsupported flow despite the option being hidden from the list. Add a useEffect to clear the selection when the persisted value is PEX. Co-authored-by: Carlos Miceli <carlosmiceli@users.noreply.github.com>

dominictb · 2026-02-18T21:46:45Z

@carlosmiceli Please reassign this

situchan · 2026-02-18T23:09:24Z

I can review as C+

carlosmiceli · 2026-02-19T19:42:32Z

I can review as C+

Let's wait for @chrispader to chime in, since the fix seems like it's not as simple as originally considered.

chrispader

LGTM

chrispader · 2026-02-20T10:40:45Z

src/pages/workspace/companyCards/addNew/SelectBankStep.tsx

    const isOtherBankSelected = bankSelected === CONST.COMPANY_CARDS.BANKS.OTHER;

+    useEffect(() => {
+        if (addNewCard?.data.selectedBank !== CONST.COMPANY_CARDS.BANKS.PEX) {


Also add a comment explaining why we exclude PEX here please 🙌🏼

situchan · 2026-02-20T14:28:37Z

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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
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: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

situchan · 2026-02-20T14:28:54Z

Unit Tests failing. Please merge main

carlosmiceli · 2026-02-20T16:12:13Z

We should hold on reviewing/testing further, @chrispader is going through some investigation notes to fix this properly 🙇

chrispader · 2026-02-23T09:40:59Z

PR with holistic fix after my recent refactoring is up here: #83192

carlosmiceli · 2026-02-23T12:32:09Z

Closing on favor of Chris' PR.

hide pex from bank step

a27d35e

carlosmiceli self-assigned this Feb 18, 2026

carlosmiceli changed the title ~~hide pex from bank step~~ Hide Pex from bank options until it's implemented in ND Feb 18, 2026

carlosmiceli marked this pull request as ready for review February 18, 2026 17:53

carlosmiceli requested review from a team as code owners February 18, 2026 17:53

melvin-bot bot requested review from dominictb and joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team February 18, 2026 17:53

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team February 18, 2026 17:53

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Feb 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

carlosmiceli requested review from situchan and removed request for dominictb February 19, 2026 19:42

carlosmiceli requested a review from chrispader February 20, 2026 01:34

chrispader approved these changes Feb 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

carlosmiceli closed this Feb 23, 2026

Comments

Conversation

carlosmiceli commented Feb 18, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Feb 18, 2026 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 18, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

carlosmiceli Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MelvinBot Feb 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dominictb commented Feb 18, 2026

Uh oh!

situchan commented Feb 18, 2026

Uh oh!

carlosmiceli commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

chrispader left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chrispader Feb 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

situchan commented Feb 20, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

situchan commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

carlosmiceli commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Feb 23, 2026

Uh oh!

carlosmiceli commented Feb 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

carlosmiceli commented Feb 18, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Feb 18, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading