Skip to content

Docs updates for E/A#94604 legal entity tax ID for Travel#95685

Open
MelvinBot wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
melvin-docs-travel-tax-id
Open

Docs updates for E/A#94604 legal entity tax ID for Travel#95685
MelvinBot wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
melvin-docs-travel-tax-id

Conversation

@MelvinBot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Details

Follow-up docs update for #94604, which adds a Tax ID page to the Expensify Travel enablement flow. When an admin enables Travel on a workspace that bills in a non-USD currency (and hasn't been provisioned yet), they're now asked for their Legal entity tax ID before accepting the travel terms and conditions.

This adds one FAQ entry to Enable Expensify Travel on a workspace explaining when and why the Tax ID page appears, and that it's skipped for USD workspaces and already-provisioned workspaces. All UI labels (Tax ID, Legal entity tax ID, Continue) were verified against the strings in the source PR.

Related

@blimpich, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then mark this PR Ready for review.

…D workspaces

Co-authored-by: Benjamin Limpich <blimpich@users.noreply.github.com>
@MelvinBot MelvinBot added the HelpDot Apply this label if the issue relates to ExpensifyHelp label Jul 9, 2026
@blimpich blimpich marked this pull request as ready for review July 9, 2026 15:56
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR adds a single new FAQ entry to docs/articles/travel/company-setup/Enable-Travel-on-a-Workspace.md explaining why a legal entity tax ID is requested when enabling Expensify Travel for non-USD workspaces. The change is small, well-scoped, and consistent with the existing FAQ structure of the article.

Scores Summary

  • Readability: 9/10 - Clear, concise, and actionable. Two short paragraphs explaining the why and the what-to-do. Good scannability.
  • AI Readiness: 9/10 - Question-based heading includes the full feature name (Expensify Travel), matches real search intent, and correctly lives as a level-2 heading under the exempt FAQ section. Metadata is untouched and remains valid.
  • Style Compliance: 8/10 - UI labels (Tax ID, Legal entity tax ID, Continue) are bolded in the article per Button/Section standards, and click Continue follows button naming rules. Minor consistency note below.

Key Findings

  • The new heading "Why am I asked for a legal entity tax ID when enabling Expensify Travel?" is question-based and feature-specific, satisfying the task-based heading requirement and correctly placed under the FAQ section.
  • UI element references are bolded correctly, matching the Core UI Referencing and Button Naming standards.
  • The answer is deterministic: it states the exact condition (non-USD workspace, travel not yet enabled), the exact action (enter ID, click Continue), and the exceptions (USD and already-enabled workspaces). This aligns with the Deterministic Writing Rule.
  • No structural regressions: still a single workflow, one article title plus one FAQ section, only level-2 sections, valid metadata.

Recommendations

  • Optional consistency check: confirm that Tax ID and Legal entity tax ID match the exact casing shown in the product UI (naming conventions require exact-match capitalization).
  • Optional: reference the exact UI label for the travel terms and conditions if one exists, per the exact-UI-text rule.

Files Reviewed

  • docs/articles/travel/company-setup/Enable-Travel-on-a-Workspace.md - One FAQ entry added. Compliant with structure, heading, and UI-referencing standards. Approve pending optional UI-casing verification.

Note: This is a summary review. The change is a single self-contained FAQ addition, so no separate inline comments were necessary.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

HelpDot Apply this label if the issue relates to ExpensifyHelp

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants