Fix vendor bill showing credit card accounts in per-card export

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Two bugs caused vendor bill export to incorrectly show credit card accounts in the per-card company card export flow:

1. getExportMenuItem fall-through bug (QBO + QBD): VENDOR_BILL was grouped into the same switch case as CREDIT_CARD, so when the export destination was vendor bill, the function returned credit card account data instead of treating it as a hidden menu item. This PR removes VENDOR_BILL from the credit card fall-through in both the QBO and QBD branches, so it now correctly hits the default case (shouldShowMenuItem: false, data: []).

2. Stale screen on back-navigation: WorkspaceCompanyCardAccountSelectCardPage never checked shouldShowMenuItem, so if the user changed the export type to vendor bill from within the account select flow and navigated back, the stale screen remained mounted showing wrong data. This PR adds a useEffect that navigates back to the card details page when shouldShowMenuItem becomes false.

Fixed Issues

$ #89148
PROPOSAL: #89148 (comment)

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review"
// Please describe what tests you performed that validates your changed worked.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out offline test steps

QA Steps

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the QA tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review".
// Please describe what QA needs to do to validate your changes and what areas do they need to test for regressions.

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

• 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

AI Tests

Test	Result
npm run lint-changed	Passed (no lintable files changed)
npx eslint (changed files)	Passed
npm run typecheck-tsgo	Passed (3 pre-existing errors in unrelated files)
npx prettier --write (changed files)	Passed
npm test -- --testPathPattern="companyCards"	Passed (2 suites, 58 tests)
npm run react-compiler-compliance-check check-changed	Skipped (git env issue in CI runner)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...ards/WorkspaceCompanyCardAccountSelectCardPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 36 files with indirect coverage changes

[aimane-chnaif]

@MelvinBot no need this change. shouldShowMenuItem is already set as false here:

App/src/pages/workspace/companyCards/utils.tsx

Line 64 in a46bd0c

let shouldShowMenuItem = nonReimbursableExpensesExportDestination !== CONST.QUICKBOOKS_NON_REIMBURSABLE_EXPORT_ACCOUNT_TYPE.VENDOR_BILL;

[MelvinBot]

You're right — shouldShowMenuItem is already set to false for VENDOR_BILL before the switch (line 64), so removing it from the fall-through was unnecessary. Reverted in d51148d.

[aimane-chnaif]

@MelvinBot revert this change

[MelvinBot]

Reverted in d51148d. Same reasoning — shouldShowMenuItem already handles VENDOR_BILL at lines 310-312.

[aimane-chnaif]

@MelvinBot after selecting Vendor Bill, it should go back to Export company card expenses as page.
But because of this goBack logic, it directly goes to Card details page as WorkspaceCompanyCardAccountSelectCardPage component is still mounted.

[MelvinBot]

You're right — the useEffect with goBack was too aggressive. When the user selects Vendor Bill, the normal navigation should return to the "Export company card expenses as" page, but the useEffect was firing and sending them directly to Card Details. Reverted in f363296.

[aimane-chnaif]

@MelvinBot how about removing WorkspaceCompanyCardAccountSelectCardPage from navigation stack when exportMenuItem?.shouldShowMenuItem = false?

[MelvinBot]

Done in e27f8ef — updated WorkspaceCompanyCardAccountSelectCardPage to use Navigation.removeScreenFromNavigationState(SCREENS.WORKSPACE.COMPANY_CARD_EXPORT) when exportMenuItem?.shouldShowMenuItem is false, following the same pattern as SubscriptionSettingsPage.tsx:45.