Docs updates for E/A#99025 move travel billing settlements toggle to export page

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Help site follow-up for #99025, which moved Sync Consolidated Travel Billing settlements and the Reconciliation account row out of Advanced and onto the Consolidated Travel Billing page under Export, and locked the toggle until a payable account is set.

Four help articles still told admins to look for that toggle on the Advanced page, so anyone following them would not find it. This updates all four:

• Configure-Quickbooks-Online.md — documents the toggle under Step 2: Configure Export Settings and notes on the Advanced step that it is no longer there.
• Configure-Xero.md — same move, using the Xero label Travel payable account.
• Configure-Netsuite.md — same move. Also renames the Export row from Export Expensify Travel Payable To to Consolidated Travel Billing, which is what the row is actually labelled, and adds the Journal posting preference row that sits on that page.
• Configure-Sage-Intacct.md — moves ## How to sync Consolidated Travel Billing settlements in Sage Intacct from Step 4: Configure Advanced Settings up under Step 3: Configure Export Settings.

Each article now also documents the new lock behaviour: the toggle stays locked until the payable/credit card account is selected and Auto-sync is enabled, and turning it on opens the reconciliation account picker before the toggle switches on.

Configure-QuickBooks-Desktop.md and Configure-Rillet.md were checked and left alone — QuickBooks Desktop only states which connections support the setting (still accurate), and Rillet keeps its own toggle on its Advanced page.

Verification notes: the labels above were verified against src/languages/en.ts and the connection pages on main. Live UI verification of the Consolidated Travel Billing page was not possible — every one of these four connections needs real third-party OAuth credentials or a Control-plan upgrade to reach the connection card, so the page cannot be opened in a test account.

AI tests run: npm run spell-changed — passed (4 files checked, 0 issues). No other tests in the matrix apply to a docs-only markdown change; docs routing and config were not touched.

Fixed Issues

$ #91505
PROPOSAL:

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review"

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the QA tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review". Docs-only change; likely "[No QA]".

• 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
• 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 followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • 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 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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
• 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)
• 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(theme.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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

---

@allgandalf, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then post a new comment saying @MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review.