* feat(invoices): add Plusgiro input to bank details settings Plusgiro was already persisted, validated by the API schema, rendered on the invoice PDF and toggleable via "Visa plusgiro" — but the settings UI had no field to enter the number, so plusgiro-only users could not fill it in. Add the input next to Bankgiro with Luhn validation and hyphen formatting, include it in the save payload (normalised on save so raw digits still match the dashed schema format), and add sv/en strings. Adds validatePlusgiroNumber/formatPlusgiroNumber helpers + tests. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(invoices): respect non-VAT-registered seller in PDF preview + portal tooltips Two user-reported bugs: - PDF preview (/api/invoices/preview-pdf) ignored company.vat_registered and fell back to the customer-driven 25% rate, so a non-momsregistrerad seller saw VAT in the review step even though the created invoice books none. Mirror the server-side write gate (build-invoice-write.ts): force 0% when vat_registered is false (delivery notes excepted). - InfoTooltip rendered TooltipContent without a Portal, so tooltips were clipped by the scrollable DialogContent (overflow-y-auto) in the send-invoice journal-entry review. Wrap in TooltipPrimitive.Portal. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(transactions): book library mall from its literal lines, not a lossy fallback Booking a bank transaction with a user-created booking-template (mall) via the convertible "QuickReview" fast path reduced the template to a single category + one account_override, silently discarding the chosen debit/credit. A kundinbetalning mall (D 1930 / K 1510) booked as a generic cost (D 6991 / K 1930), or with a VAT line as D 1930 / K 1930 / K 2611 — and the result flipped with the direction inferred from the business/settlement line tags, so visually-identical templates produced different verifikationer. Route every library template through the journal-entry editor (applyTemplate -> /book), which posts the literal lines, regardless of convertibility. Add regression tests locking the contract. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(bookkeeping): make the booking-time duplicate guard bypassable TRANSACTION_BOOK_POSSIBLE_DUPLICATE told users they could "book anyway" but the UI dead-ended on a toast with no way to do so. Add a shared DuplicateBookingDialog that surfaces the already-booked sibling and lets the user review it or book anyway (force bound to the reviewed candidate, which the server re-detects so a stale id cannot wave the guard away). - Wire the dialog into the /transactions categorize flow and the manual booking dialog (JournalEntryForm -> /api/transactions/[id]/book) - Bind the override to expected_duplicate_transaction_id OR expected_duplicate_journal_entry_id so ledger-only vouchers (paid invoice, salary run) can be confirmed too - Extend the guard to the pending-operations commit path and the MCP server - Tests for book/categorize routes, detection, and the commit guard Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(bookkeeping): log duplicate-guard bypass to behandlingshistorik in the agent commit path The web /book and /categorize routes append a durable BankTransactionDuplicateDismissed event when a user books over a detected possible double-booking. The agent commit path (commitCategorizeTransaction, commitMarkInvoicePaid) skipped the guard silently on allow_duplicate=true, leaving no behandlingshistorik — an auditor could not reconstruct why the duplicate was allowed (BFNAR 2013:2 kap 8). When allow_duplicate=true, re-detect the candidate and append the dismissal event (BankTransactionDuplicateDismissed for the bank-line path, InvoiceDuplicatePaymentDismissed for mark-paid). Best-effort — a logging failure never blocks a legitimate booking. Payloads stay PII-safe (ids, amounts, dates only — no customer or merchant name). Also fix the misleading DuplicateBookingDialog JSDoc: the retry binds expected_duplicate_journal_entry_id, not candidate.transaction_id, so the systemdokumentation matches the actual control (BFL 7 kap). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * test(mcp-server): stub booking-duplicate guard in receipt-matcher categorize tests The gnubok_categorize_transaction tool runs the booking-time duplicate guard before staging; its detection queries consumed the queued supabase mock results, so the staging assertions saw a thrown duplicate error instead of a staged op. Mock detectBookingDuplicate to "no duplicate" since these tests don't exercise that path. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * refactor(transactions): use roundOre for duplicate-guard öre rounding Replace naive Math.round(x*100)/100 with roundOre() from @/lib/money in the booking-time duplicate guard (detection lib, commit executor, MCP categorize tool), satisfying the no-new-antipatterns ratchet guard. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
893 lines
35 KiB
TypeScript
893 lines
35 KiB
TypeScript
import type { SupabaseClient } from '@supabase/supabase-js'
|
||
import { NextResponse } from 'next/server'
|
||
import { eventBus } from '@/lib/events'
|
||
import { ensureInitialized } from '@/lib/init'
|
||
import { buildMappingResultFromCategory } from '@/lib/bookkeeping/category-mapping'
|
||
import { getTemplateById, buildMappingResultFromTemplate, validateTemplateForEntity } from '@/lib/bookkeeping/booking-templates'
|
||
import { createTransactionJournalEntry } from '@/lib/bookkeeping/transaction-entries'
|
||
import { detectBookingDuplicate } from '@/lib/transactions/booking-duplicate-detection'
|
||
import { appendProcessingHistory } from '@/lib/processing-history/append'
|
||
import { saveUserMappingRule, applySettlementAccount } from '@/lib/bookkeeping/mapping-engine'
|
||
import { upsertCounterpartyTemplate, buildMappingResultFromCounterpartyTemplate } from '@/lib/bookkeeping/counterparty-templates'
|
||
import { withRouteContext } from '@/lib/api/with-route-context'
|
||
import { errorResponse, errorResponseFromCode } from '@/lib/errors/get-structured-error'
|
||
import {
|
||
DUPLICATE_AMOUNT_TOLERANCE_PCT,
|
||
DUPLICATE_DATE_WINDOW_DAYS,
|
||
escapeLikePattern,
|
||
normalizeOcrReference,
|
||
} from '@/lib/invoices/duplicate-payment-guard'
|
||
import { AccountsNotInChartError, accountsNotInChartResponse, isBookkeepingError } from '@/lib/bookkeeping/errors'
|
||
import { collectMappingResultAccounts, findUnresolvableAccounts } from '@/lib/bookkeeping/account-validation'
|
||
import { getErrorMessage } from '@/lib/errors/get-error-message'
|
||
import type { Logger } from '@/lib/logger'
|
||
import type { CategorizationTemplate } from '@/types'
|
||
import { validateBody } from '@/lib/api/validate'
|
||
import { CategorizeTransactionSchema } from '@/lib/api/schemas'
|
||
import type { Transaction, TransactionCategory, EntityType } from '@/types'
|
||
|
||
ensureInitialized()
|
||
|
||
/**
|
||
* Ensure a fiscal period exists for the given date, create one if needed.
|
||
*/
|
||
async function ensureFiscalPeriod(
|
||
supabase: SupabaseClient,
|
||
userId: string,
|
||
companyId: string,
|
||
date: string,
|
||
fiscalYearStartMonth: number,
|
||
log: Logger,
|
||
): Promise<boolean> {
|
||
const { data: existing } = await supabase
|
||
.from('fiscal_periods')
|
||
.select('id')
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.lte('period_start', date)
|
||
.gte('period_end', date)
|
||
.eq('is_closed', false)
|
||
.limit(1)
|
||
|
||
if (existing && existing.length > 0) return true
|
||
|
||
const txDate = new Date(date)
|
||
const txMonth = txDate.getMonth() + 1
|
||
const txYear = txDate.getFullYear()
|
||
|
||
let periodStartYear: number
|
||
if (fiscalYearStartMonth === 1) {
|
||
periodStartYear = txYear
|
||
} else if (txMonth >= fiscalYearStartMonth) {
|
||
periodStartYear = txYear
|
||
} else {
|
||
periodStartYear = txYear - 1
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
const startMonth = String(fiscalYearStartMonth).padStart(2, '0')
|
||
const periodStart = `${periodStartYear}-${startMonth}-01`
|
||
|
||
const endYear = fiscalYearStartMonth === 1 ? periodStartYear : periodStartYear + 1
|
||
const endMonth = fiscalYearStartMonth === 1 ? 12 : fiscalYearStartMonth - 1
|
||
const lastDay = new Date(endYear, endMonth, 0).getDate()
|
||
const periodEnd = `${endYear}-${String(endMonth).padStart(2, '0')}-${String(lastDay).padStart(2, '0')}`
|
||
|
||
const periodName = fiscalYearStartMonth === 1
|
||
? `Räkenskapsår ${periodStartYear}`
|
||
: `Räkenskapsår ${periodStartYear}/${endYear}`
|
||
|
||
const { error } = await supabase
|
||
.from('fiscal_periods')
|
||
.upsert({
|
||
user_id: userId,
|
||
company_id: companyId,
|
||
name: periodName,
|
||
period_start: periodStart,
|
||
period_end: periodEnd,
|
||
}, {
|
||
onConflict: 'company_id,period_start,period_end',
|
||
})
|
||
|
||
if (error) {
|
||
log.error('failed to create fiscal period', error)
|
||
return false
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
return true
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
export const POST = withRouteContext(
|
||
'transaction.categorize',
|
||
async (request, ctx, { params }: { params: Promise<{ id: string }> }) => {
|
||
const { id } = await params
|
||
const { user, supabase, companyId, log, requestId } = ctx
|
||
|
||
const validation = await validateBody(request, CategorizeTransactionSchema, {
|
||
log,
|
||
operation: 'transaction.categorize',
|
||
})
|
||
if (!validation.success) return validation.response
|
||
const body = validation.data
|
||
const { is_business, category } = body
|
||
|
||
const { data: transaction, error: fetchError } = await supabase
|
||
.from('transactions')
|
||
.select('*')
|
||
.eq('id', id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.single()
|
||
|
||
if (fetchError || !transaction) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TX_CATEGORIZE_TX_NOT_FOUND', log, { requestId })
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
const txLog = log.child({ transactionId: id })
|
||
|
||
// Already-categorized fast path: just update flags, leave the JE alone.
|
||
if (transaction.journal_entry_id) {
|
||
const finalCat: TransactionCategory = is_business ? (category || 'uncategorized') : 'private'
|
||
|
||
const { error: updateErr } = await supabase
|
||
.from('transactions')
|
||
.update({ is_business, category: finalCat })
|
||
.eq('id', id)
|
||
|
||
if (updateErr) {
|
||
txLog.error('failed to update already-categorized transaction', updateErr)
|
||
return errorResponse(updateErr, txLog, { requestId })
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
return NextResponse.json({
|
||
success: true,
|
||
journal_entry_created: false,
|
||
journal_entry_id: transaction.journal_entry_id,
|
||
journal_entry_error: null,
|
||
category: finalCat,
|
||
already_had_journal_entry: true,
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Booking-time duplicate guard: this transaction is about to become a NEW
|
||
// verifikat. If another transaction on the same date+amount+account is
|
||
// already booked, booking this one double-counts one real affärshändelse
|
||
// (felaktig bokföring per BFL). Warn; the user confirms with force=true
|
||
// bound to the reviewed sibling. Mirrors the match-invoice soft-duplicate
|
||
// guard. Runs before any categorization work so the user resolves it first.
|
||
try {
|
||
const candidate = await detectBookingDuplicate(supabase, companyId, {
|
||
id,
|
||
date: transaction.date,
|
||
amount: transaction.amount,
|
||
cash_account_id: transaction.cash_account_id ?? null,
|
||
})
|
||
if (!body.force) {
|
||
if (candidate) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TRANSACTION_BOOK_POSSIBLE_DUPLICATE', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: { candidate },
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
} else if (
|
||
// force=true is bound to the reviewed candidate. A sibling-transaction
|
||
// candidate carries a transaction_id; a ledger-only voucher candidate
|
||
// does not, so both are bound by journal_entry_id. Re-detect and refuse
|
||
// the bypass unless it still matches, so a guessed id can't wave it away.
|
||
!candidate ||
|
||
!(
|
||
(candidate.journal_entry_id && candidate.journal_entry_id === body.expected_duplicate_journal_entry_id) ||
|
||
(candidate.transaction_id && candidate.transaction_id === body.expected_duplicate_transaction_id)
|
||
)
|
||
) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TRANSACTION_BOOK_FORCE_CANDIDATE_MISMATCH', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: {
|
||
expected_duplicate_transaction_id: body.expected_duplicate_transaction_id ?? null,
|
||
expected_duplicate_journal_entry_id: body.expected_duplicate_journal_entry_id ?? null,
|
||
detected_transaction_id: candidate?.transaction_id ?? null,
|
||
detected_journal_entry_id: candidate?.journal_entry_id ?? null,
|
||
},
|
||
})
|
||
} else {
|
||
txLog.warn('booking-time duplicate guard bypassed', {
|
||
reason: 'force=true',
|
||
requestId,
|
||
dismissedTransactionId: candidate.transaction_id,
|
||
})
|
||
// Persist the dismissal to behandlingshistorik (BFNAR 2013:2 kap 8) —
|
||
// booking over a DETECTED possible double-booking is a bookkeeping
|
||
// decision that needs a durable record. Best-effort; never blocks the
|
||
// booking.
|
||
try {
|
||
await appendProcessingHistory({
|
||
companyId,
|
||
correlationId: id,
|
||
aggregateType: 'BankTransaction',
|
||
aggregateId: id,
|
||
eventType: 'BankTransactionDuplicateDismissed',
|
||
payload: {
|
||
transaction_id: id,
|
||
dismissed_transaction_id: candidate.transaction_id,
|
||
dismissed_journal_entry_id: candidate.journal_entry_id,
|
||
amount_ore: Math.round(candidate.amount * 100),
|
||
entry_date: candidate.entry_date,
|
||
},
|
||
actor: { type: 'user', id: user.id },
|
||
occurredAt: new Date(),
|
||
})
|
||
} catch (logErr) {
|
||
txLog.error('failed to append duplicate-dismissal behandlingshistorik', logErr as Error)
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
} catch (err) {
|
||
if (body.force) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TRANSACTION_BOOK_FORCE_CANDIDATE_MISMATCH', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: { detection_failed: true },
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
txLog.warn('booking-time duplicate detection failed (continuing)', err as Error)
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
const { data: settings } = await supabase
|
||
.from('company_settings')
|
||
.select('entity_type, fiscal_year_start_month')
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.single()
|
||
|
||
const entityType: EntityType = (settings?.entity_type as EntityType) || 'enskild_firma'
|
||
const fiscalYearStartMonth: number = settings?.fiscal_year_start_month ?? 1
|
||
|
||
let finalCategory: TransactionCategory
|
||
if (body.template_id) {
|
||
const template = getTemplateById(body.template_id)
|
||
if (!template) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TX_CATEGORIZE_INVALID_TEMPLATE', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: { templateId: body.template_id, reason: 'unknown_template' },
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
const entityValidation = validateTemplateForEntity(template, entityType)
|
||
if (!entityValidation.valid) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TX_CATEGORIZE_INVALID_TEMPLATE', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: { templateId: body.template_id, reason: entityValidation.error },
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
finalCategory = is_business ? template.fallback_category : 'private'
|
||
txLog.info('using template', {
|
||
template: body.template_id,
|
||
templateName: template.name_sv,
|
||
category: finalCategory,
|
||
debit: template.debit_account,
|
||
credit: template.credit_account,
|
||
})
|
||
} else {
|
||
finalCategory = is_business ? (category || 'uncategorized') : 'private'
|
||
txLog.info('using category', {
|
||
category: finalCategory,
|
||
vatTreatment: body.vat_treatment ?? null,
|
||
accountOverride: body.account_override ?? null,
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
let mappingResult
|
||
if (body.counterparty_template_id && is_business) {
|
||
const { data: cpTemplate } = await supabase
|
||
.from('categorization_templates')
|
||
.select('*')
|
||
.eq('id', body.counterparty_template_id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.eq('is_active', true)
|
||
.maybeSingle()
|
||
|
||
if (!cpTemplate) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('NOT_FOUND', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: { resource: 'counterparty_template', id: body.counterparty_template_id },
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
const match = {
|
||
template: cpTemplate as CategorizationTemplate,
|
||
matchMethod: 'exact_alias' as const,
|
||
confidence: Number(cpTemplate.confidence),
|
||
}
|
||
mappingResult = buildMappingResultFromCounterpartyTemplate(match, transaction as Transaction, entityType)
|
||
txLog.info('using counterparty template', {
|
||
counterparty: cpTemplate.counterparty_name,
|
||
lines: cpTemplate.line_pattern ? 'multi' : 'simple',
|
||
})
|
||
} else if (body.template_id) {
|
||
const template = getTemplateById(body.template_id)!
|
||
mappingResult = buildMappingResultFromTemplate(template, transaction as Transaction, entityType)
|
||
} else {
|
||
mappingResult = buildMappingResultFromCategory(
|
||
finalCategory,
|
||
transaction as Transaction,
|
||
is_business,
|
||
entityType,
|
||
body.vat_treatment,
|
||
)
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Book the bank leg against the transaction's ACTUAL settlement account
|
||
// rather than the hardcoded 1930 in the templates. Without this, interest
|
||
// or fees that landed on a savings/EUR account mis-book to 1930 and the
|
||
// real bank line never reconciles. applySettlementAccount only rewrites a
|
||
// 1930 leg and is a no-op when the settlement account is 1930 — so legacy
|
||
// rows with no cash_account_id behave exactly as before.
|
||
let settlementAccount = '1930'
|
||
if (transaction.cash_account_id) {
|
||
const { data: txCashAccount, error: cashAccountError } = await supabase
|
||
.from('cash_accounts')
|
||
.select('ledger_account')
|
||
.eq('id', transaction.cash_account_id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.maybeSingle()
|
||
if (cashAccountError) {
|
||
// Don't fail the booking — fall back to 1930 — but surface the lookup
|
||
// failure so a silent mis-booking to the wrong bank leg stays auditable.
|
||
txLog.warn('settlement-account lookup failed; defaulting to 1930', {
|
||
cashAccountId: transaction.cash_account_id,
|
||
error: cashAccountError.message,
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
if (txCashAccount?.ledger_account) {
|
||
settlementAccount = txCashAccount.ledger_account as string
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
mappingResult = applySettlementAccount(mappingResult, settlementAccount)
|
||
|
||
txLog.info('mapping resolved', {
|
||
debit: mappingResult.debit_account,
|
||
credit: mappingResult.credit_account,
|
||
allLinesComplete: mappingResult.all_lines_complete || false,
|
||
vatLineCount: mappingResult.vat_lines.length,
|
||
})
|
||
|
||
if (is_business && body.account_override && !body.template_id && !body.counterparty_template_id) {
|
||
const { data: accountExists } = await supabase
|
||
.from('chart_of_accounts')
|
||
.select('account_number, account_class')
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.eq('account_number', body.account_override)
|
||
.eq('is_active', true)
|
||
.single()
|
||
|
||
if (!accountExists) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TX_CATEGORIZE_INVALID_ACCOUNT', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: { accountNumber: body.account_override },
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (transaction.amount < 0) {
|
||
mappingResult.debit_account = body.account_override
|
||
} else {
|
||
mappingResult.credit_account = body.account_override
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (accountExists.account_class === 2) {
|
||
mappingResult.vat_lines = []
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (!mappingResult.debit_account || !mappingResult.credit_account) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TX_CATEGORIZE_INVALID_MAPPING', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: {
|
||
debitAccount: mappingResult.debit_account,
|
||
creditAccount: mappingResult.credit_account,
|
||
},
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Pre-validate every account the engine will resolve. Templates,
|
||
// counterparty templates, and category defaults can all reference accounts
|
||
// that aren't activated in this company's kontoplan. Without this check,
|
||
// the engine throws AccountsNotInChartError mid-flight and the legacy
|
||
// catch below silently marks the transaction as bokförd with no
|
||
// verifikation. Catching it here means the row stays in "Att bokföra"
|
||
// and the user gets a clear actionable message.
|
||
//
|
||
// Only truly unresolvable accounts block: a standard BAS account that is
|
||
// merely absent from the chart is seeded on demand by the engine, so the
|
||
// user can always book the row without registering accounts first.
|
||
const missingAccounts = await findUnresolvableAccounts(
|
||
supabase,
|
||
companyId,
|
||
collectMappingResultAccounts(mappingResult),
|
||
)
|
||
if (missingAccounts.length > 0) {
|
||
txLog.warn('mapping references inactive/unknown accounts', { missingAccounts })
|
||
return accountsNotInChartResponse(new AccountsNotInChartError(missingAccounts))
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (body.confirm_no_match && /^244\d$/.test(mappingResult.debit_account)) {
|
||
txLog.warn('supplier-invoice match suggestion bypassed', {
|
||
reason: 'confirm_no_match=true',
|
||
debitAccount: mappingResult.debit_account,
|
||
creditAccount: mappingResult.credit_account,
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
if (body.confirm_no_match && /^151\d$/.test(mappingResult.credit_account)) {
|
||
txLog.warn('customer-invoice match suggestion bypassed', {
|
||
reason: 'confirm_no_match=true',
|
||
debitAccount: mappingResult.debit_account,
|
||
creditAccount: mappingResult.credit_account,
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Prong B: intercept plain 244x categorization of supplier payments when
|
||
// an open supplier invoice already covers this amount. Categorizing direct
|
||
// to 244x leaves the invoice with status='approved' and lures the user
|
||
// into a duplicate "Markera som betald" later. Credit must be a bank/cash
|
||
// account (1xxx) — 244x against a clearing account, equity, etc. isn't a
|
||
// supplier payment and the suggestion would misdirect the user.
|
||
if (
|
||
!body.confirm_no_match &&
|
||
is_business &&
|
||
transaction.amount < 0 &&
|
||
/^244\d$/.test(mappingResult.debit_account) &&
|
||
/^1\d{3}$/.test(mappingResult.credit_account)
|
||
) {
|
||
const txAmountAbs = Math.abs(transaction.amount)
|
||
const windowLow = Math.round(txAmountAbs * (1 - DUPLICATE_AMOUNT_TOLERANCE_PCT) * 100) / 100
|
||
const windowHigh = Math.round(txAmountAbs * (1 + DUPLICATE_AMOUNT_TOLERANCE_PCT) * 100) / 100
|
||
|
||
let supplierIds: string[] = []
|
||
if (transaction.merchant_name) {
|
||
const escapedMerchant = escapeLikePattern(transaction.merchant_name)
|
||
const { data: matchedSuppliers } = await supabase
|
||
.from('suppliers')
|
||
.select('id')
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.ilike('name', `%${escapedMerchant}%`)
|
||
.limit(10)
|
||
supplierIds = (matchedSuppliers || []).map((s) => s.id)
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (supplierIds.length > 0) {
|
||
// Restrict candidates to invoices within the date window relative to
|
||
// the bank tx date. Without this, an open invoice from years back can
|
||
// surface as a match and misdirect the user (swedish-compliance bot).
|
||
const txDateMs = new Date(transaction.date).getTime()
|
||
const invoiceDateLow = new Date(txDateMs - DUPLICATE_DATE_WINDOW_DAYS * 24 * 3600 * 1000)
|
||
.toISOString()
|
||
.split('T')[0]
|
||
const invoiceDateHigh = new Date(txDateMs + DUPLICATE_DATE_WINDOW_DAYS * 24 * 3600 * 1000)
|
||
.toISOString()
|
||
.split('T')[0]
|
||
|
||
const { data: openInvoices } = await supabase
|
||
.from('supplier_invoices')
|
||
.select('id, supplier_invoice_number, invoice_date, remaining_amount, currency, supplier:suppliers(name)')
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.in('supplier_id', supplierIds)
|
||
.in('status', ['registered', 'approved', 'partially_paid', 'overdue'])
|
||
.gte('remaining_amount', windowLow)
|
||
.lte('remaining_amount', windowHigh)
|
||
.gte('invoice_date', invoiceDateLow)
|
||
.lte('invoice_date', invoiceDateHigh)
|
||
.order('invoice_date', { ascending: false })
|
||
.limit(5)
|
||
|
||
if (openInvoices && openInvoices.length > 0) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TX_CATEGORIZE_SUGGEST_SI_MATCH', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: {
|
||
candidates: openInvoices.map((inv) => ({
|
||
supplier_invoice_id: inv.id,
|
||
invoice_number: inv.supplier_invoice_number,
|
||
invoice_date: inv.invoice_date,
|
||
remaining_amount: inv.remaining_amount,
|
||
currency: inv.currency,
|
||
supplier_name: (inv.supplier as { name?: string } | null)?.name ?? null,
|
||
})),
|
||
},
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Prong B (customer side): intercept plain 151x categorization of an
|
||
// inbound payment when an unpaid customer invoice already covers this
|
||
// amount. Symmetric with the supplier-side intercept above. The debit
|
||
// must be a bank/cash account (^19\d{2}$, BAS class 19) — a 1xxx debit
|
||
// outside class 19 isn't a payment receipt and the suggestion would
|
||
// misdirect the user.
|
||
if (
|
||
!body.confirm_no_match &&
|
||
is_business &&
|
||
transaction.amount > 0 &&
|
||
/^19\d{2}$/.test(mappingResult.debit_account) &&
|
||
/^151\d$/.test(mappingResult.credit_account)
|
||
) {
|
||
const txAmount = transaction.amount
|
||
const windowLow = Math.round(txAmount * (1 - DUPLICATE_AMOUNT_TOLERANCE_PCT) * 100) / 100
|
||
const windowHigh = Math.round(txAmount * (1 + DUPLICATE_AMOUNT_TOLERANCE_PCT) * 100) / 100
|
||
|
||
// Resolve candidate customer(s) by name. Inbound bank txs are typically
|
||
// described by payer name in EITHER merchant_name OR description, so
|
||
// search both. OCR-direct lookup is below.
|
||
let customerIds: string[] = []
|
||
const searchTerms: string[] = []
|
||
if (transaction.merchant_name) searchTerms.push(transaction.merchant_name)
|
||
if (transaction.description) searchTerms.push(transaction.description)
|
||
const collected = new Set<string>()
|
||
for (const term of searchTerms) {
|
||
const escaped = escapeLikePattern(term)
|
||
const { data: matched } = await supabase
|
||
.from('customers')
|
||
.select('id')
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.ilike('name', `%${escaped}%`)
|
||
.limit(10)
|
||
for (const c of matched ?? []) collected.add(c.id)
|
||
}
|
||
customerIds = Array.from(collected)
|
||
|
||
// Date window anchored on `due_date`, NOT `invoice_date`. Customer
|
||
// payments arrive close to (or after) the due date; for an invoice
|
||
// with 60–90 day terms, anchoring on invoice_date would push the
|
||
// expected payment outside a ±60-day window and the guard would miss
|
||
// genuine matches. due_date is the better proxy for "around when the
|
||
// payment is expected."
|
||
const txDateMs = new Date(transaction.date).getTime()
|
||
const dueDateLow = new Date(txDateMs - DUPLICATE_DATE_WINDOW_DAYS * 24 * 3600 * 1000)
|
||
.toISOString()
|
||
.split('T')[0]
|
||
const dueDateHigh = new Date(txDateMs + DUPLICATE_DATE_WINDOW_DAYS * 24 * 3600 * 1000)
|
||
.toISOString()
|
||
.split('T')[0]
|
||
|
||
type CandidateRow = {
|
||
id: string
|
||
invoice_number: string | null
|
||
invoice_date: string
|
||
due_date: string | null
|
||
remaining_amount: number | null
|
||
total: number
|
||
currency: string
|
||
customer: { name?: string } | null
|
||
}
|
||
const openInvoiceCandidates: CandidateRow[] = []
|
||
|
||
if (customerIds.length > 0) {
|
||
const { data: byCustomer } = await supabase
|
||
.from('invoices')
|
||
.select(
|
||
'id, invoice_number, invoice_date, due_date, remaining_amount, total, currency, customer:customers(name)',
|
||
)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.in('customer_id', customerIds)
|
||
.in('status', ['sent', 'overdue', 'partially_paid'])
|
||
.gte('remaining_amount', windowLow)
|
||
.lte('remaining_amount', windowHigh)
|
||
.gte('due_date', dueDateLow)
|
||
.lte('due_date', dueDateHigh)
|
||
.order('due_date', { ascending: false })
|
||
.limit(5)
|
||
for (const row of (byCustomer ?? []) as unknown as CandidateRow[]) {
|
||
openInvoiceCandidates.push(row)
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// OCR pass: if the bank-tx reference matches an open invoice's
|
||
// invoice_number, surface it regardless of customer-name match. This
|
||
// catches the common case where the bank populated `reference` but
|
||
// neither merchant_name nor description carried the customer name.
|
||
const txReference = (transaction as Transaction & { reference?: string | null }).reference
|
||
const normalizedTxRef = normalizeOcrReference(txReference ?? null)
|
||
if (normalizedTxRef) {
|
||
const { data: byRef } = await supabase
|
||
.from('invoices')
|
||
.select(
|
||
'id, invoice_number, invoice_date, due_date, remaining_amount, total, currency, customer:customers(name)',
|
||
)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.in('status', ['sent', 'overdue', 'partially_paid'])
|
||
.gte('remaining_amount', windowLow)
|
||
.lte('remaining_amount', windowHigh)
|
||
.gte('due_date', dueDateLow)
|
||
.lte('due_date', dueDateHigh)
|
||
.order('due_date', { ascending: false })
|
||
.limit(20)
|
||
for (const row of (byRef ?? []) as unknown as CandidateRow[]) {
|
||
if (normalizeOcrReference(row.invoice_number) === normalizedTxRef) {
|
||
if (!openInvoiceCandidates.some((existing) => existing.id === row.id)) {
|
||
openInvoiceCandidates.unshift(row)
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (openInvoiceCandidates.length > 0) {
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TX_CATEGORIZE_SUGGEST_CI_MATCH', txLog, {
|
||
requestId,
|
||
details: {
|
||
candidates: openInvoiceCandidates.slice(0, 5).map((inv) => {
|
||
const reasonOcr =
|
||
normalizedTxRef && normalizeOcrReference(inv.invoice_number) === normalizedTxRef
|
||
return {
|
||
invoice_id: inv.id,
|
||
invoice_number: inv.invoice_number,
|
||
invoice_date: inv.invoice_date,
|
||
remaining_amount: inv.remaining_amount ?? inv.total,
|
||
currency: inv.currency,
|
||
customer_name: inv.customer?.name ?? null,
|
||
match_reason: reasonOcr ? ('ocr_exact' as const) : ('name_amount_fuzzy' as const),
|
||
}
|
||
}),
|
||
},
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
await ensureFiscalPeriod(supabase, user.id, companyId, transaction.date, fiscalYearStartMonth, txLog)
|
||
|
||
let journalEntryCreated = false
|
||
let journalEntryId: string | null = null
|
||
let journalEntryError: string | null = null
|
||
let documentLinkWarning: string | null = null
|
||
|
||
try {
|
||
const journalEntry = await createTransactionJournalEntry(
|
||
supabase,
|
||
companyId,
|
||
user.id,
|
||
transaction as Transaction,
|
||
mappingResult,
|
||
)
|
||
|
||
if (journalEntry) {
|
||
journalEntryCreated = true
|
||
journalEntryId = journalEntry.id
|
||
}
|
||
} catch (err) {
|
||
txLog.error('failed to create transaction journal entry', err as Error)
|
||
// AccountsNotInChartError means an account was deactivated between our
|
||
// pre-validation and the engine call (rare race). Don't fall through to
|
||
// the partial-success path — that would mark the transaction bokförd
|
||
// with no verifikation and leave the user staring at an unclosable
|
||
// dialog. Return a structured 400 so the row stays in "Att bokföra"
|
||
// and the user can re-activate the account and retry.
|
||
if (err instanceof AccountsNotInChartError) {
|
||
return accountsNotInChartResponse(err)
|
||
}
|
||
// Bookkeeping errors map to Swedish via the registry. Other errors get
|
||
// their raw message — the categorization is preserved either way so the
|
||
// user can still re-book the verifikation manually.
|
||
if (isBookkeepingError(err)) {
|
||
journalEntryError = getErrorMessage(err, { context: 'transaction' })
|
||
} else {
|
||
journalEntryError = err instanceof Error ? err.message : 'Unknown error'
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (is_business && transaction.merchant_name) {
|
||
try {
|
||
await saveUserMappingRule(
|
||
supabase,
|
||
companyId,
|
||
transaction.merchant_name,
|
||
mappingResult.debit_account,
|
||
mappingResult.credit_account,
|
||
!is_business,
|
||
body.user_description,
|
||
body.template_id,
|
||
)
|
||
} catch (err) {
|
||
txLog.warn('failed to save mapping rule (non-critical)', err as Error)
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
try {
|
||
await upsertCounterpartyTemplate(
|
||
supabase, user.id, transaction as Transaction, mappingResult, 'user_approved',
|
||
)
|
||
} catch (err) {
|
||
txLog.warn('failed to upsert counterparty template (non-critical)', err as Error)
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (journalEntryId && transaction.receipt_id) {
|
||
try {
|
||
const { data: receipt } = await supabase
|
||
.from('receipts')
|
||
.select('document_id')
|
||
.eq('id', transaction.receipt_id)
|
||
.single()
|
||
|
||
if (receipt?.document_id) {
|
||
await supabase
|
||
.from('document_attachments')
|
||
.update({ journal_entry_id: journalEntryId })
|
||
.eq('id', receipt.document_id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
}
|
||
} catch (linkErr) {
|
||
txLog.warn('failed to link receipt document (non-critical)', linkErr as Error)
|
||
}
|
||
} else if (journalEntryId && transaction.document_id) {
|
||
// Document was pinned to the transaction (via /attach-document or MCP) before
|
||
// categorization. Propagate the link to the journal entry so
|
||
// receipt-on-verifikation (BFL 5 kap 6 §) is satisfied. The journal entry has
|
||
// already been committed at this point, so we can't roll it back; instead
|
||
// surface a warning in the response so the UI can prompt the user to retry
|
||
// the link. Supabase JS returns { error } rather than throwing — destructure
|
||
// and surface it, never swallow silently.
|
||
try {
|
||
const { error: linkErr } = await supabase
|
||
.from('document_attachments')
|
||
.update({ journal_entry_id: journalEntryId })
|
||
.eq('id', transaction.document_id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
if (linkErr) {
|
||
txLog.error('failed to link transaction document', linkErr, {
|
||
documentId: transaction.document_id,
|
||
})
|
||
documentLinkWarning =
|
||
'Verifikationen skapades men bilagan kunde inte länkas till den. Försök länka om bilagan manuellt.'
|
||
}
|
||
} catch (docErr) {
|
||
txLog.error('failed to link transaction document', docErr as Error, {
|
||
documentId: transaction.document_id,
|
||
})
|
||
documentLinkWarning =
|
||
'Verifikationen skapades men bilagan kunde inte länkas till den. Försök länka om bilagan manuellt.'
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if (body.inbox_item_id && journalEntryId) {
|
||
try {
|
||
const { data: inboxItem } = await supabase
|
||
.from('invoice_inbox_items')
|
||
.select('document_id')
|
||
.eq('id', body.inbox_item_id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.single()
|
||
|
||
if (inboxItem?.document_id) {
|
||
await supabase
|
||
.from('document_attachments')
|
||
.update({ journal_entry_id: journalEntryId })
|
||
.eq('id', inboxItem.document_id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Reflect the booking back onto the inbox row so it stops appearing as
|
||
// unmatched. Categorizing here puts the underlag on a verifikation,
|
||
// which is the inbox's "booked" state. Without this the inbox keeps
|
||
// offering "Matcha mot transaktion" for an underlag that's already on a
|
||
// posted entry — while the transactions view (which reads the
|
||
// doc↔verifikat link) already shows it as attached. Mirrors the
|
||
// backfill that /attach-document does for the manual paperclip path.
|
||
await supabase
|
||
.from('invoice_inbox_items')
|
||
.update({
|
||
matched_transaction_id: id,
|
||
created_journal_entry_id: journalEntryId,
|
||
})
|
||
.eq('id', body.inbox_item_id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
} catch (inboxErr) {
|
||
txLog.warn('failed to sync inbox item after booking (non-critical)', inboxErr as Error)
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
const { data: updateResult, error: updateError } = await supabase
|
||
.from('transactions')
|
||
.update({
|
||
is_business,
|
||
category: finalCategory,
|
||
journal_entry_id: journalEntryId,
|
||
})
|
||
.eq('id', id)
|
||
.is('journal_entry_id', null)
|
||
.select('id')
|
||
|
||
if (updateError) {
|
||
txLog.error('failed to update transaction', updateError)
|
||
return errorResponse(updateError, txLog, { requestId })
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
if ((!updateResult || updateResult.length === 0) && journalEntryId) {
|
||
// CAS guard: another request set journal_entry_id between our read and
|
||
// write. Cancel the orphaned entry and document the voucher gap.
|
||
const { data: orphan } = await supabase
|
||
.from('journal_entries')
|
||
.select('fiscal_period_id, voucher_series, voucher_number')
|
||
.eq('id', journalEntryId)
|
||
.single()
|
||
|
||
await supabase
|
||
.from('journal_entries')
|
||
.update({ status: 'cancelled' })
|
||
.eq('id', journalEntryId)
|
||
|
||
if (orphan) {
|
||
await supabase.from('voucher_gap_explanations').insert({
|
||
company_id: companyId,
|
||
fiscal_period_id: orphan.fiscal_period_id,
|
||
voucher_series: orphan.voucher_series || 'A',
|
||
gap_number: orphan.voucher_number,
|
||
explanation: 'Automatiskt makulerad: dubblettbokning förhindrad av samtidighetsskydd',
|
||
created_by: user.id,
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
return errorResponseFromCode('TX_CATEGORIZE_RACE', txLog, { requestId })
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Flag any inbox underlag already matched to this transaction as booked.
|
||
// The block above only fires when the caller passes an explicit
|
||
// inbox_item_id (booking straight from the inbox flow). Booking the same
|
||
// transaction from anywhere else — the /transactions list, quick review —
|
||
// would otherwise leave an attached underlag stuck as "Kopplad" in the
|
||
// inbox forever. Here we resolve it by the link itself (matched_transaction
|
||
// _id) so the inbox reflects the booking regardless of entry point. Mirrors
|
||
// the propagation in lib/pending-operations/commit.ts. Runs post-CAS so we
|
||
// never stamp the inbox with a journal entry that lost the race.
|
||
if (journalEntryId) {
|
||
try {
|
||
const { data: matchedInboxItems } = await supabase
|
||
.from('invoice_inbox_items')
|
||
.select('id, document_id')
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
.eq('matched_transaction_id', id)
|
||
.is('created_journal_entry_id', null)
|
||
|
||
for (const inbox of (matchedInboxItems ?? []) as Array<{
|
||
id: string
|
||
document_id: string | null
|
||
}>) {
|
||
if (inbox.document_id) {
|
||
await supabase
|
||
.from('document_attachments')
|
||
.update({ journal_entry_id: journalEntryId })
|
||
.eq('id', inbox.document_id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
}
|
||
await supabase
|
||
.from('invoice_inbox_items')
|
||
.update({ created_journal_entry_id: journalEntryId })
|
||
.eq('id', inbox.id)
|
||
.eq('company_id', companyId)
|
||
}
|
||
} catch (inboxErr) {
|
||
txLog.warn('failed to flag matched inbox items after booking (non-critical)', inboxErr as Error)
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
await eventBus.emit({
|
||
type: 'transaction.categorized',
|
||
payload: {
|
||
transaction: transaction as Transaction,
|
||
account: mappingResult.debit_account,
|
||
taxCode: mappingResult.vat_lines[0]?.account_number || '',
|
||
userId: user.id,
|
||
companyId,
|
||
},
|
||
})
|
||
|
||
if (journalEntryError) {
|
||
// Categorization stuck but the verifikation didn't make it through.
|
||
// Surface as a structured warning — the response below carries the
|
||
// user-facing message in `journal_entry_error`.
|
||
txLog.warn('partial outcome: journal entry creation failed', {
|
||
reason: 'journal_entry_creation_failed',
|
||
message: journalEntryError,
|
||
})
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
return NextResponse.json({
|
||
success: true,
|
||
journal_entry_created: journalEntryCreated,
|
||
journal_entry_id: journalEntryId,
|
||
journal_entry_error: journalEntryError,
|
||
document_link_warning: documentLinkWarning,
|
||
category: finalCategory,
|
||
})
|
||
},
|
||
{ requireWrite: true },
|
||
)
|