Read the general pathway comparison overview
Hypothetical example: a thirty-percent co-owner of an Erin precision-machining shop compares an employer-sponsored L-1A transfer with buying a US machine shop for E-2. On L-1A the company files and can end the employment; on E-2 the individual commits qualifying capital and must develop and direct an enterprise that continues to qualify. His existing Canadian ownership does not by itself establish either route. Hypothetical example: the owner of a Canadian custom-orthotics manufacturer can either transfer to oversee a related U.S. subsidiary or personally acquire a controlling stake in an unrelated distributor. She must decide whether she wants an employer-based role built on a qualifying corporate relationship or an investment she controls and funds herself. The ownership documents and purchase terms settle that choice.
What his thirty per cent means on each route
For L-1A, owning part of the Canadian employer is not a disqualification. He must have one continuous year of qualifying employment abroad within the preceding three years, the Canadian and US entities must have a qualifying relationship and remain active, and the US duties must be primarily managerial or executive. A new office receives only a one-year initial approval and must show premises and capacity to support that role within the year; L-1A is capped at seven years. For E-2, his Canadian shares do not establish control of the US enterprise: he must develop and direct that enterprise through at least fifty percent ownership or another means of operational control. Ask whether the U.S. entity already has the ownership relationship and operating activity needed for a transfer, and whether the beneficiary has the required qualifying employment abroad. The company must also choose a role that is genuinely managerial, executive, or based on specialised knowledge rather than a title assigned for immigration purposes.
Who can stop it, and when
An L-1A depends on the qualifying employer continuing the employment and both related entities remaining active. An E-2 depends on an irrevocably committed and at-risk investment in a real, operating enterprise that remains substantial, non-marginal and at least fifty percent owned by treaty nationals, with the investor continuing to develop and direct it. Exact fifty-percent treaty ownership can satisfy the nationality threshold; a majority is not required. E-2 has no direct path to permanent residence. For the investment route, map nationality, control, and the money that becomes committed to the purchase. The investor must be able to develop and direct a real enterprise, with funds exposed to business risk and an operation that is not marginal. Decide whether the business evidence supports those conditions before signing.
Questions to put to each counterparty
To his co-owners: is the American subsidiary a committed plan with capital behind it, will it be an established operation or a new office, and what happens to his role and shares if it is wound up. A new office need not be trading before filing, but it must have sufficient premises and capacity to support a managerial or executive position within one year. To a prospective seller: what are the last three years of statements, who are the customers, what does the equipment need, and will the deposit be held in escrow. To his accountant: what does either route do to his Erin holding and tax position. Ask which risk the household can actually manage: a corporate reorganisation or a business purchase that fails to meet its forecast. The choice should also account for the L maximum stay periods and the fact that an E-2 does not itself create permanent residence. Put an exit plan beside each option before choosing. The transfer route requires an uninterrupted qualifying employment year abroad during the three years leading to filing. The L-1A maximum is generally seven years and the L-1B maximum is generally five.
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.