Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:
This issue occured because in the previous update we add a condition to restrict multiple tax groups excluding the STLG.
Apparently there is a case where some users create their own tax groups (for example for PPH) so when they want to print an efaktur it will raise an error.

Current behavior before PR:
If a user create their own tax with a new tax group (outside of the 6 groups defined in `l10n_id`) and use it in invoice line along with one of the 6 tax groups excluding the STLG then it will blocked the print efaktur because it will raise an error  

Desired behavior after PR is merged:
- The restriction in tax groups only applied for the 6 tax groups in l10n_id so if an invoice line
  has multiple tax groups as long as there no more than one of the 6 tax groups excluding the STLG then
  it should be able to print the efaktur.
- Also when building the efaktur coretax value, the new tax group should not be included in the regular_tax
  variable which will cause the value to be 11/12 of the original value.
- Add new condition to block the print efaktur if there is a tax inside the invoice but none of it
  belong to the 6 ppn tax groups (there is already a condition to block if no tax is given, but now since there
  are cases where they use tax group outside of the defined tax groups then it will print the efaktur)
- If an invoice line does not have any ppn_tax_groups but there are other line in the same invoice
  that has it then it will still be able to print the efaktur, but the line without the ppn tax will
  have the OtherTaxBase and VATRate set to zero which will calculate the VAT as 0 too.

[5434656](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/5434656)


---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#241979

Steps:
- Install `pos_restaurant_loyalty`
- Create a discount for example: if 2 coca -> 10%
- Open a restaurant session
- Open another restaurant session with the same user in incognito
- Add 2 coca + sushi in session 1 and press "Order"
- In session 2 products are automatically added, in live
- Try to validate the order from session 2
- Traceback

Traceback is due to the fact that, in order to synchronize, session 1 must send data to the server, which in turn sends further data to all sessions.

The problem is that as coupons are only created once the order has been validated, they are not yet “really created” on the customer side. To avoid sending “invalid” records, we remove them from the data via an override of the `serialize` method in `Base`.

But since python doesn't receive coupons, it can't send coupons to other sessions, so if we try to pay with the session that didn't initially get the discount, it will cause a traceback.

The solution is to remove `is_reward_line` as well. Because it already makes no sense to have a `PosOrderLine` which is a reward line without a coupon, and then because it will regenerate the discounts in the new session.

opw-4892767

The SYSCOHADA gross margin is defined on page 330 - 331 of the document [Guide-d-application-du-SYSCOHADA.pdf](https://www.ohada.com/uploads/actualite/3504/Guide-d-application-du-SYSCOHADA.pdf). It is TA (701) - RA (601) +/- RB (6031). TA and RA should always be positive and negative, respectively.

In the report "Profit and Loss (SYSCOHADA)", the line RA is negated. XA then subtracts this value from TA, adding the two values instead of subtracting them.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Create a new company on runbot.
2. In Accounting > Configuration > Settings, set their Fiscal Localization to Ginea - SYSCOHADA for Companies.
3. Make a MISC journal entry.
    1. Set a credit of 110,000,000 on account 701100 and balance it with 411100.
    5. Set a debit of 75,000,000 on account 601100 and balance it with 401100.
    6. Set a credit of 5,000,000 on account 603100 and balance it with 411100.
7. Post the entry.
8. Navigate to Accounting > Reports > Profit and Loss.
9. Set the l10n version, Profit and Loss (SYSCOHADA).
10. Set the current date.
11. See XA = 110 million + 75 million + 5 million = 190 million; this does not match the example given on pg 357 of Guide-d-application-du-SYSCOHADA.pdf, where XA = 40 million.

[opw-5482300](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project.task/project.task/5482300)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#104479

Steps to reproduce the bug

- Create a storable product P1:
  - Tracking: Serial Number
- Log in as Marc Demo
- Create a sales order with 1 unit of P1
- Validate the delivery using serial number SN1
- Log in as Mitchell Admin
- Go to Settings:
  - Manage Users
    - Mitchell Admin
      - Sales: User: own documents only
- Go to the Serial Numbers list view:
  - Try to open SN1

**Problem:**
An access error is triggered:

```
Uh-oh! Looks like you have stumbled upon some top-secret records.

Sorry, Mitchell Admin (id=2) doesn't have 'read' access to:
- Sales Order Line, S00025 - P1 (Deco Addict) (sale.order.line: 51)

Blame the following rules:
- Personal Order Lines
```

When clicking on SN1, the `stock.lot` form view.
it's contains the field "sale_order_count", which is a computed field that needs to access all `sale.order` records using the serial number in order to compute the count.

Since Mitchell Admin is restricted to his own sales orders only, an access error is raised during the computation.

There is also a many2many view widget that triggers an access errors. This widget can be removed since the smart button is now available. The widget has already been removed in v19.

**Solution:**
In this view, any stock user, admin or not, must be able to see how many sales orders use a given serial number, regardless of whether those sales orders belong to them or not.

opw-5400731

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Install modules `sale_management` and `l10n_din5008_sale`
2. Go to Settings, Configure Document Layout and set layout to DIN 5008
3. Create a new Sale Order
4. Set a customer, add a product, and fill in the Delivery Date (Other Info)
5. Click on Print and Preview

**Issue:**
The Delivery Date (commitment_date) is not displayed on:
- The DIN 5008 sale order report
- The sale order preview (portal view)

Functional experts confirmed that the Delivery Date must be visible when using the DIN 5008 layout.

**Cause:**
The `commitment_date` field was not included in the DIN 5008 sale order report template nor in the preview view.

**Solution:**
This commit adds the Delivery Date information to:
- The DIN 5008 sale order report template
- The sale order portal/preview view

**opw-5490651**

**Before:**
<img width="560" height="145" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/fb29cda1-d668-4682-aa04-12c613f248d8" />
<img width="861" height="268" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/615f259f-e0ff-4fb5-9852-1fdd75cda4c9" />

**After:**
<img width="589" height="145" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3f1a8d25-783a-4600-b07e-11b547bb326b" />
<img width="824" height="271" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/46b37469-5c72-4556-95e2-eaea0824c166" />

Issue:

When using negative amounts, for example to explicitly show a discount, the tax calculation is incorrect due to the application of the `abs` function. Furthermore, the way to find out if a tax is of the withholding type is based on the sign of the value, which can lead to error in these cases.

Cause:

A previous change (#237235) added the `abs` function so the `TotalTaxesWithheld` would be always with positive value. But this also affects the calculation of taxes `TotalTaxOutputs` in some cases, such as if the invoice line has negative values.

Steps to reproduce:

- Install `l10n_es_edi_facturae`
- With the ES company, create an invoice with some standard lines and one line with negative amounts, as an explicit discount
- Confirm the invoice and send (facturae)
- Open the XML attached in the chatter
- Observe that the taxes amounts (VAT and WITHHOLDING) are erroneous

A correct invoice should be for example:

```
Product        Price       Taxes       Amount
---------------------------------------------
PRODUCT-A       1000    21%VAT 15%WHI    1000
Discount        -100    21%VAT 15%WHI    -100
---------------------------------------------
                       Untaxed amount     900
                      Withholding 15%    -135
                              VAT 21%     189
                      -----------------------
                                 TOTAL    954
```

This PR replaces #240808 

---
I confirm I have signed the [CLA](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/157955) and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

### Issue:
On a Mexican sale order, it was possible to have an invalid partner address while `CFDI to Public` was not enabled
In this situation, an online payment could be initiated, but a silent error occurred during move validation:
the transaction was created, but the payment was never recorded, and no error appeared in the portal or the SO chatter

### Cause:
The CFDI validation error is raised internally but never surfaced to the user
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/91655
The PO (MIAL) recommended automatically enabling `CFDI to Public` when the partner address is incomplete,
forcing the user to complete the data This also ensures that the payment can be confirmed properly

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_mx_edi_sale` and switch to the MX company
- Configure a Payment Provider and Payment Method (e.g., demo)
- Create a customer without ZIP or country
- Create a Sale Order for that customer
- In Other Info, set Online Payment to 100%
- Send the quotation and open the link in a private window
- Sign and Pay

Before the fix: the transaction is created, but no payment is recorded, and no error is shown

opw-5023724

The "Not Sent" filter in Payments list view was not returning the expected records. This was due to an incorrect domain condition in the search view.

This commit updates the filter logic to properly identify payments that haven't been processed or sent, ensuring the filter displays the correct records to the user.

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**
This PR fixes a bug in the "Not Sent" search filter within the Payment views (Account Payments). Currently, the filter fails to accurately identify and display records that have not been sent, leading to an empty or incorrect list of results regardless of the sending payment's actual status.

**Current behavior before PR:**
When a user applies the "Not Sent" filter in the Payments list view (including both Customer and Vendor payments), the system returns incorrect records or no records at all. This is caused by an inconsistent domain definition that doesn't align with the internal field tracking the "sent" status of the payment.

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
The "Not Sent" filter will correctly filter the list to show only those payments where the "Sent" status is not True. This will provide users with an accurate view of pending actions for both Customer and Vendor payments, ensuring consistency across the accounting module.

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Navigate to the Accounting (or Invoicing) module.
2. Go to Vendors > Payments or Customers > Payments (the issue is global).
3. Ensure there are several payments in the list, some marked as "Sent" and others not yet sent.
4. Click on the Filters dropdown menu in the search bar.
5. Select the "Not Sent" filter.
6. Observe the results: Notice that the list either becomes empty or continues to show records that do not match the "Not Sent" criteria, failing to filter the data correctly.

**video**
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NTKQ1tHWyZWfs3CPolfDTOMrqaDD9OcN/view
---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr