Read the general pathway comparison overview
A Portugal Cove-St. Philip's owner of a home-care staffing agency can reach the United States either by having her Canadian company open a U.S. subsidiary and transferring herself as L-1A executive, or by personally buying a U.S. home-care franchise under E-2. The first depends on the corporate relationship and her year of employment; the second on her own funds at risk and control. The question to put to the accountant and the lawyer is which structure the ownership already supports. The central decision is whose enterprise and whose employment history will carry the case. An L-1A plan relies on a continuing qualifying relationship and a completed foreign-employment period; an E-2 plan relies on the investor's treaty nationality, ownership or control, committed personal capital, and a real business that is not marginal. A household should not blend the best facts of two different structures. Put each route on its own page, list the documents it needs, and choose the one whose facts can be true at filing and in the first year after arrival.
Two structures, two sets of facts
Hypothetical example: a Portugal Cove-St. Philip's owner holds all the shares of a Canadian agency that places personal-care workers with families and long-term-care homes, and has drawn a salary as its managing director for five years. Under L-1A, the Canadian company forms a U.S. subsidiary, secures premises, and petitions to transfer her as its executive; the subsidiary must be able to support the role within a year and the Canadian agency must keep operating. Under E-2, she personally invests her own money in a U.S. home-care franchise she will own and run; the funds must be irrevocably committed and substantial, and the franchise must be real and non-marginal. The same person, the same industry, but entirely different evidence.
Questions for the accountant
Ask whether the Canadian agency can fund a subsidiary and a year of U.S. losses without starving the Canadian operation, because L-1A requires both entities to remain active. Ask whether her personal funds, as distinct from the company's, are sufficient for an E-2 purchase and can be traced to a lawful source. Ask how a franchise agreement's controls over branding, pricing and territory sit with the requirement that she develop and direct the business; heavy franchisor control can be argued either way and should be examined on the actual agreement. And ask about the seven-year L-1A ceiling against the renewable but non-immigrant nature of E-2, since neither provides a direct route to permanent residence. Hypothetical example: the owner of a commercial mushroom-growing supply company can either form a related U.S. subsidiary and transfer after a qualifying foreign year, or personally buy a separate U.S. greenhouse-equipment distributor. The first route requires a genuine corporate relationship and a role that becomes managerial; the second requires the owner to commit personal funds at risk and direct the purchased business. The decision is whether the existing company can sustain a cross-border structure, or whether the owner prefers to accept the financial exposure of an independent acquisition.
Questions for the lawyer, and how to sequence
Ask whether her five years as managing director will be characterized as executive or managerial, given that a small agency owner often does hands-on scheduling; the L-1A petition must show primarily managerial duties. Ask whether an E-2 franchise investment made through a newly formed U.S. company she wholly owns preserves the Canadian-nationality ownership requirement. Then sequence: if L-1A is chosen, form the subsidiary, lease premises and hire before filing; if E-2, sign the franchise agreement with funds in escrow released on visa issuance. Do not run both in parallel with the same money. Her spouse may work incident to status under either route; children study only. Make a written comparison of who controls the U.S. entity, who pays the principal, which funds are exposed to loss, and what happens if the foreign company contracts or the new business misses its forecast. That exercise often reveals the decisive fact: a company with no succession plan may not support a transfer, while a buyer without enough committed funds may not support an investor case. Choose a route before signing agreements that assume the other one.
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.