Read the general pathway comparison overview
A person may be both an employee and an investor. Assess the transfer and investment possibilities from a single accurate record, while keeping the requirements distinct. A share certificate alone neither proves qualifying employment nor explains the ability to direct a treaty enterprise.
Build a chronology of both relationships
Hypothetical example: a manager buys shares in the Canadian employer shortly before a proposed U.S. move. Record when employment began, what duties were performed, when shares were acquired and what rights changed. Preserve payroll and duty evidence from before the acquisition instead of describing the entire period as ownership.
Identify what the U.S. proposal would require
For L-1, assess the qualifying entities, continuous qualifying year abroad in the relevant three-year period and the intended managerial, executive or specialized-knowledge role. For E-2, assess the applicant’s and enterprise’s treaty nationality, committed at-risk substantial investment, non-marginality and development and direction. Do not combine a strong employment record with someone else’s investment and treat the result as one satisfied test.
Compare the practical consequences after eligibility
Record who would receive the applicant’s services, where work would occur and which transaction remains incomplete. Add each family member’s intended activities. Qualifying E and L spouses may work incident to valid status with appropriate evidence; children do not receive the same work benefit. Evaluate commercial exposure and immigration eligibility separately before deciding which facts justify proceeding.
What else is on your mind?
Does being a business owner or director qualify me for L-1A?What employment history should an L-1 transfer review cover?What makes a new-office L-1A case different?How should an owner compare L-1 and E-2?Editorial source review: 2026-09-07. General preparation guidance, not an individual assessment.