*: stock_barcode_mrp, stock_barcode_picking_batch

## Issue Before This PR:
When navigating from the Barcode client action
(e.g. picking, inventory, etc.) to related form views
(such as lot, product, or company), the breadcrumb
would sometimes display an unnamed entry instead
of the originating document name.
This caused confusion for users, as they could not
easily identify which document they were coming from
when navigating to related records from the Barcode interface.

## Steps to Reproduce:
- Install the Barcode module.
- Open the Barcode app and navigate to:
     - Delivery Orders.
     - Manufacturing Orders
     - Batch Pickings
     - Inventory Count
- From any of these open a record
  (e.g. picking, MO, batch, inventory line)
- Click on document name or edit button on the line.
- Click on an external link (e.g. product, lot, company).
- Observe that the breadcrumb shows an unnamed entry.

## Cause of the Issue:
- When switching views inside the Barcode client action,
  the FormController calls `setDisplayName(this.displayName())`.
  In some cases, this returns an empty string, overwriting the
  previously set breadcrumb name.
- In several form views, the `display_name` field was not present,
  preventing the controller from retrieving a proper name.

## With This PR:
The Barcode views now display the correct document names in the
breadcrumb when navigating to external links, allowing users to easily
identify the originating document when opening related records from
the Barcode app.

TaskID: 4978997

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112988
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#99165

### Issue:
Negative values in the Mod 390 report were not properly marked with the N indicator for several fields

### Cause:
The parameter `signed=True` was missing on some fields where negative values should include the N indicator in the BOE export

### Note:
According to the official specification, negative amounts must be explicitly marked with N
Latest documentation:
https://sede.agenciatributaria.gob.es/static_files/Sede/Disenyo_registro/DR_300_399/archivos_25/dr390e2025.xlsx

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `l10n_es_reports` with demo data and switch to the ES company
- Create a Bill (Price: 100, Taxes: 21% G)
- Go to Tax Report and select Tax Report (Mod 390) (ES) for the full year
- Open the VAT Deductible tab
- The last line (65) should be negative
- Export the BOE file using the gear menu
- Check the last value of section 4 in the file

### Before the fix:
Negative values were not marked with N

opw-5482706

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#113200
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#111262

### Issue before this commit:
Before this commit, validating an Italian withholding tax return could incorrectly include taxes that are not related to withholding. In particular, pension fund taxes such as 4% INPS were included in the computed total amount to pay, even though they should not be part of the withholding tax return. As a result, the final amount shown in the return was incorrect.

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting and l10n_it and switch to italian company
2. Create an invoice and a bill with a witholding tax (ex. 20% RIT PF)
3. Mark them as paid and reconcile them
4. Open a tax return and validate it
5. See that the total amount calculated includes also other taxes than only witholding taxes

### Cause of the issue:
The issue was caused by a missing domain restriction when computing the tax closing entries. The method _get_vat_closing_entry_additional_domain did not properly apply a filter on tax tags for the withholding tax return type l10n_it_reports.it_withh_tax_return_type. Because of this, the query used to compute tax balances included all taxes matching the generic conditions (date, company, posted state, etc.), without restricting them to the relevant withholding tax tags. Consequently, unrelated taxes were included in the computation.

### Reason to introduce the fix:
To restore the correctness of the tax return totals.

opw-5905355

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#112638

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install modules `account_batch_payment` and `l10n_ch`.
2. Configure SEPA Credit Transfer for a CH company.
3. Create a vendor bill with a reference containing `&` (e.g. "Net & Cost"), confirm it and register a payment using SEPA Credit Transfer.
4. Create a batch payment with the SEPA payment and validate it.

Issue:
The `&` character is exported as `&amp` in the generated PAIN XML,
while according to the SIX specification it should be replaced with `+`

Cause:
The payment reference is inserted into the PAIN XML file without replacing the '&' character. During XML generation this produces an invalid entity (`&`) which results in an `XMLSyntaxError` and prevents the payment file from being processed.

Solution:
Replace the `&` character with `+` when sanitizing the payment communication so that the generated value complies with the SEPA/SIX character set and produces valid XML.

Reference[Pg: 9]: https://www.europeanpaymentscouncil.eu/sites/default/files/KB/files/EPC217-08%20Draft%20Best%20Practices%20SEPA%20Requirements%20for%20Character%20Set%20v1.1.pdf

opw-5941724

Co-authored by @bhra-odoo

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#110809