Original PR description

### Issue before this commit: The XML export for branch companies incorrectly identified the branch as the sender, even when a Peppol parent company was configured. ### Steps to reproduce the issue:…

### Issue before this commit:
The XML export for branch companies incorrectly identified the branch as the sender, even when a Peppol parent company was configured.

### Steps to reproduce the issue:
1. Download Accounting, Contacts and l10n_be
2. Create a branch for a Belgium company
3. Enable Peppol sending on the parent company
4. Enable Peppol sending on the branch company using the parent company endpoint
5. Switch to branch company
6. Create a customer invoice in the branch company using a customer who is on the Peppol network (meaning insert a valid VAT number and then verify button in the Accounting tab)
7. Confirm and send the invoice via Peppol
8. Download the resulting xml file and check the "AccountingSupplierParty" nodes. It contains the data of the branch and not the ones of the parent company

### Cause of the issue:
The EDI export logic was fetching the supplier data directly from the invoice's company record without checking for a delegated Peppol parent company, ignoring the hierarchical relationship defined in the settings.

### Reason to introduce the fix:
This fix ensures that the AccountingSupplierParty in the UBL/CII file correctly reflects the parent company's data when applicable.

opw-6030526

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

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#260389

When computing the price of a non-rental product in a rental order, the rental dates are added to the price computation kwargs. However, the rental dates and the date kwargs are incompatible when…

When computing the price of a non-rental product in a rental order, the rental dates are added to the price computation kwargs.

However, the rental dates and the date kwargs are incompatible when fetching applicable rules for a product.

One restricts rules to a range, whereas the other restricts rules to a specific date.

For non-rental products, the rental dates should not be forwarded; only the date argument should be.

```python
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Users/lipiraux/dev/odoo/master/odoo/odoo/http/router.py", line 432, in serve_db
    return retrying(serve_func, env=request.env)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  ...
  File "/Users/lipiraux/dev/odoo/master/odoo/addons/sale/controllers/product_configurator.py", line 72, in sale_product_configurator_get_values
    **self._get_product_information(
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  ...
  File "/Users/lipiraux/dev/odoo/master/enterprise/sale_renting/models/product_pricelist.py", line 40, in _compute_price_rule
    results = super()._compute_price_rule(
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/Users/lipiraux/dev/odoo/master/odoo/addons/product/models/product_pricelist.py", line 201, in _compute_price_rule
    rules = self._get_applicable_rules(products, quantity, date=date, uom=uom, **kwargs)
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/Users/lipiraux/dev/odoo/master/odoo/addons/product/models/product_pricelist.py", line 273, in _get_applicable_rules
    self._get_applicable_rules_domain(
  File "/Users/lipiraux/dev/odoo/master/enterprise/sale_renting/models/product_pricelist.py", line 242, in _get_applicable_rules_domain
    assert not kwargs.get("date"), "Incompatible arguments"
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
AssertionError: Incompatible arguments
```

task-6020137

Several error are logged in the chatter when signing a payslip that includes an IMSS incapacity time off.

Steps to reproduce:
* Install l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account modules
* Switch to "INNOVACION VALOR Y DESARROLLO SA SA" company
* Go to Employees and open Cesar Osbaldo Cruz Solorzano
* Click on "Time Off" smart button and create a new time off with
  "Disability due to illness (IMSS)" type for "02/01/2026"(Any date).
* Go to Payroll > Payslips > Payslips and create a new pay run
* Select Salary Structure 'Mexico: Regular Pay', Pay Schedule 'Monthly'
  and the Period '01/01/2026 -> 01/31/2026'
* Click on Continue, select Cesar and click on Select
* Open the payslip, click on "Validate" and "Ok"
* Mark as paid, open the "Journal Entry" from the smart button and click
  on "Post".
* Back to the payslip, and click on "Generate CFDI" button.
* An error is added to the chatter.

### Missing node to declare disabilities
Translated message
```py
An error occurred while signing the CFDI document with the government:
Code: NOM111 Message: Unclassified error. Extra Info: The "Incapacidades"
(Disabilities) node must be reported if the perception key 014
"Subsidios por Incapacidad" (Disability Subsidies) is included, or if
the deduction key 006 "Descuento por incapacidad" (Disability Deduction)
is included.
```

Legal Context:
According to Mexican law, IMSS disabilities must be declared in a specific XML node.

There are two primary scenarios for reporting these amounts:
* Deduction (Type 006): The employer does not pay for these days, as the IMSS is responsible for the payment to the employee. This is the most common scenario.

* Perception (Type 014): The employer pays for these days as a superior benefit. For example, by law, the IMSS does not pay for the first 3 days of a disability due to illness, and employers are not obligated to cover them either. However, companies offering superior benefits may choose to pay these days as a "Disability Subsidy."

Solution:
The chosen approach is to configure the Deduction node.
For the `l10n_mx_regular_pay_imss_disabilities` rule, the `l10n_mx_concept` has been set to `l10n_mx_concept_d6` (D06 - Disability Deduction). This ensures the required node is added.

### Missing "ImporteMonetario" attribute
Translated message
```
An error occurred while signing the CFDI document with the government:
Code: NOM95 Message: The attribute "Deduccion:Importe" does not match
the sum of the "Incapacidad:ImporteMonetario" nodes, as the key
expressed in "Nomina.Deducciones.Deduccion.TipoDeduccion" is "006".
```

Problem:
The "Incapacidades" node requires the "ImporteMonetario" attribute, which should represent the sum of the monetary value associated with the disabilities.

Solution:
Add the "ImporteMonetario" attribute and calculate its value using `l10n_mx_daily_salary`.

### Invalid "DiasIncapacidad" format
```py
An error occurred while signing the CFDI document with the government:
Code : 301 Message : XML mal formado Extra Info : Element
'{http://www.sat.gob.mx/nomina12}Incapacidad', attribute
'DiasIncapacidad': '4.0' is not a valid value of the local atomic type.
```

Problem:
Altough the defaultdict where the values are sum up, `number_of_days` is a float field, and when we get back the value, it is a float, adding for example 4.0 instead of 4, which is not a valid value.

Solution:
Cast the value to int.

### Duplicate deduction on disabilities
```py
Wrong python code defined for:
- Employee: Cesar Osbaldo Cruz Solorzano
- Version: False
- Payslip: Salary Slip - Cesar Osbaldo Cruz Solorzano - 05/01/2026 - 05/15/2026
- Salary rule: ISR (Income Tax) (ISR)
- Error: TypeError('cannot unpack non-iterable NoneType object') while
evaluating
"
def find_rates(x, rates):
    for low, high, fix, rate in rates:
        if low <= x <= high:
            return low, high, fix, rate

gross = categories['GROSS']
result = 0
if gross:
    isr_table = payslip._rule_parameter('l10n_mx_isr_tables')[version.schedule_pay]
    low, high, fix, rate = find_rates(gross, isr_table)
    result = -((gross - low) * rate + fix)

period_factor = payslip._rule_parameter('l10n_mx_schedule_table')[version.schedule_pay]
if period_factor >= 15:
    period_factor = (period_factor / 30) * (365 / 12)
min_wage = payslip._rule_parameter('l10n_mx_daily_min_wage') * period_factor

if gross <= min_wage:
    result_qty = 0.0
"
```

Problem:
The IMSS incapacity amount is being deducted twice:
1. During "Worked Days" calculation, the IMSS incapacity is already not considered because the work entries belong to the "Unpaid Work Entry Types" of "Mexico: Regular Pay" structure.
2. During "Salary Computation", the `IMSS_DISABLE` salary rule deducts another time because it is in the `TAXABLE_ALW` category, and this one is deducted in the `NET` rule.

When the incapacity covers more than half of the period (e.g., 20 days in a monthly schedule), the double deduction causes the NET to become negative. This prevents the ISR rule from finding a correct stage in the tax tables, leading to a traceback.

Example: For a monthly wage of 30,000.0 and 5 incapacity days:
- The total amount in "Worked Days" is 25,000.0 (incapacities already deducted).
- The IMSS_DISABLE rule calculates -5,000.0, and when the NET rule is calculated, the incapacities are deducted again. Total NET becomes 16,843.84 instead of the expected 20,834.85.

Solution:
Change the rule category to `INTERMEDIARY_COMPUTATION` and avoid the double deduction when the `NET` is calculated, as it is already considered in the "Worked Days".

### Absenteeism and Disabilities
By law, the calculation of IMSS contributions depends on these two types of unpaid days:
* Disabilities: Refers to medical leave issued by the Institute (IMSS).
* Absenteeism: Refers to unjustified leave; apply for periods of fewer than 8 days.

Source: [Artículo 31](https://www.imss.gob.mx/sites/all/statics/pdf/leyes/LSS.pdf)
Translated text:
> Article 31. When wages are not paid due to the employee's absence from work, but the employment relationship persists, the monthly contribution shall be adjusted according to the following rules:
> I. If the employee's absences are for periods of fewer than eight consecutive or non-consecutive days, contributions shall be calculated and paid for such periods only for the sickness and maternity insurance...
If the employee's absences are for periods of eight consecutive days or more, the employer shall be released from the payment of employer-employee contributions...
> IV. In the case of absences covered by medical disabilities issued by the Institute, it shall not be mandatory to cover the employer-employee contributions, except regarding the retirement branch.

The following table summarizes the contribution requirements based on the type of absence:
Insurance Branch                  | Section I (Absenteeism) | Section IV (Disability)
--------------------------------|-------------------------|------------------------
Sickness and Maternity          | Paid                    | Not Paid
Disability and Life             | Not Paid                | Not Paid
Severance and Old Age           | Not Paid                | Not Paid
Work Risk                       | Not Paid                | Not Paid
Daycare and Social Benefits     | Not Paid                | Not Paid
INFONAVIT                       | Not Paid                | Paid
Retirement                      | Not Paid                | Paid

The type of unpaid day to be considered depends on the specific insurance branch being calculated within the employer-employee contributions.

Incorrect values in the XML
The signing process completes without errors, but some amounts in the generated XML are incorrect.

Problem:
The introduction of the Deduction 006 (Disability) directly impacts the calculation of the SubTotal and Total attributes in the Comprobante node.
For a monthly payslip with a wage of 30,000.00 (daily salary of 1,000.00) and 5 disability days (work risk), the values are calculated incorrectly as follows:
Attribute            | Calculation                      | Actual Value | Correct Value
---------------------|----------------------------------|--------------|--------------
Comprobante:SubTotal | Sum of Perceptions (P01)         | 25000.00     | 30000.00 (1)
Comprobante:Total    | SubTotal - Total Deductions (2)  | 15803.74     | 20803.74

(1) Must include the 5,000.00 from disabilities to balance the deduction.
(2) Total Deductions = D06 (5,000.00) + ISR (3,451.65) + IMSS (744.61) = 9,196.26.

The Total is currently undercalculated because the 5,000.00 is being deducted from the SubTotal that already had those 5,000.00 excluded.

Solution:
Since the `SubTotal` is derived from Perceptions, and the "(P01) Salaries, Wages, Stripes, and Day Labor" amount is driven by the `GROSS_WITHOUT_HOLIDAY` rule, the disability amount must be added. This balances the Deduction 006, ensuring `SubTotal` is correct.

* Add test for CFDI with incapacities.

target: 19.0
task-6066160

Original PR description

__ ## Short functional explanation of the error When we have a subscription product that has already been sold. If we try to import a product with the same ID but where we change the subscription…

__

## Short functional explanation of the error
When we have a subscription product that has already been sold. If we try to import a product with the same ID but where we change the subscription type of the product, the import is executed without issue. However, this leads to undesired behavior:
when we go to the product page and try to manually change the subscription type (set it back to subscription), the change is not applied as a warning is raised.

## Reproduction Steps
Make sure you have debug mode enabled.
1. Create a product, and check the Subscription box.
2. Click on Orders and create a Quotation with this product, then confirm.
3. Go to Products > Products. Select the list view and search for the product you just created. Select it, and click Actions > Export.
4. Check the import compatible field. Select the fields to export: name, id and recurring_invoice. Upon exporting, a file is downloaded.
5. Access that file and change the recurring_invoice to FAUX or FALSE if your computer is in English. Save the changes.
6. Unselect the product and click on the cog, top right > Import. Click on Upload Data File and select the file that you have downloaded upon exporting, then import.

### Expected behavior
A user warning is raised: we shouldn't be able to change the subscription type of the product when it has already been sold.

### Unexpected behavior
The import is processed normally. Then, when we access the product page, and try to check the Subscriptions box again, a warning is raised.

## Origin of the issue
Nothing prevents the import from occurring in that case.

__
opw-6143789