Fix - [Unreported] Add distance rate to the distance expenses tracked in selfDM

[FitseTLT]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #72230
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Precondition: Have a default workspace with distance rate enabled and several rates created

1. Go to self dm
2. Track distance
3. Go to confirm page
4. Verify that the rate is set to the default workspace default rate
5. Click on the rate menu
6. Verify that the rates listed are distance rates from the default workspace
7. Select any and confirm creating the expense
8. Verify that the tracked expense has the rate you selected in (7)
9. Press on Submit it to someone
10. Select a workspace other than the default
11. On the confirm page, verify that if there is no rate in the selected workspace that matches the expense's rate error will be shown, and you cannot create the expense until you select a proper rate but if there is a rate that exactly matches the expense rate in the selected workspace that rate will be automatically set.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as above

QA Steps

Same as above

• 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 verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
  • 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.js 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(themeColors.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 form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label 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

2025-12-06.00-56-10.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

2025-12-03.17-53-59.mp4

iOS: Native

2025-12-03.19-40-55.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

2025-12-03.17-52-46.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

2025-12-03.17-52-02.mp4

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.tsx	58.65% <100.00%> (+0.19%)	⬆️
src/components/TransactionItemRow/index.tsx	81.45% <100.00%> (+1.13%)	⬆️
src/libs/DistanceRequestUtils.ts	81.61% <100.00%> (+0.27%)	⬆️
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts	58.74% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/TransactionPreviewUtils.ts	73.59% <100.00%> (+0.66%)	⬆️
src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts	71.83% <ø> (-0.21%)	⬇️
.../components/MoneyRequestConfirmationListFooter.tsx	84.26% <0.00%> (ø)
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts	72.94% <0.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts	66.31% <66.66%> (+0.07%)	⬆️
src/pages/iou/request/DistanceRequestStartPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 4 more
... and 17 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@parasharrajat 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]

[JmillsExpensify]

Agree that mileage expenses should have a rate even when added in selfDM

[cristipaval]

@FitseTLT @parasharrajat, the currency edits on unreported distance requests will be disabled as part of this PR

[parasharrajat]

Can you please add test steps @FitseTLT?

[FitseTLT]

Can you please add test steps @FitseTLT?

Oh sorry updated @parasharrajat

[trjExpensify]

@parasharrajat what's the ETA on the review?

[parasharrajat]

@trjExpensify I have started review but this can not be merged until we have the taxes PR merged.

[parasharrajat]

@FitseTLT Please merge main.

[cristipaval]

bump @FitseTLT

[FitseTLT]

Sorry for the delay merged @parasharrajat

[trjExpensify]

@FitseTLT can you fix the conflicts?
@parasharrajat can you provide an ETA on the re-review?

Let's try our best to get this deployed before the week is out!

[FitseTLT]

Conflict resolved

[trjExpensify]

@parasharrajat is this waiting on you to review?

[parasharrajat]

Why is this different from Category field? Can we use shouldNavigateToUpgradePath here?

[parasharrajat]

what is the use of this param? Earlier we were dependent on isPolicyExpenseChat?

[FitseTLT]

We use it for applying the default rate of policyForMovingExpenses on a new track distance expense. To do that we pass policyForMovingExpenses as the policy and set isTrackDistanceExpense to return the default rate. Previously we only returned a policy rate for isPolicyExpenseChat case only.