No. Ownership and employment are separate matters. The general rule looks for one continuous year of qualifying employment abroad within the relevant preceding three-year period, and shareholding does not establish that a person was employed. Title and ownership also do not establish a managerial or executive role.
Prove the working relationship, not the stake
The share register answers the corporate relationship question and nothing else. Employment is shown by terms of engagement, duties performed, direction given and received, and a record of pay in some form. Where an owner-manager was compensated mainly by distributions, the employment relationship may still have existed, but it has to be explained with evidence.
The timing analysis is case-specific and belongs with licensed US immigration counsel. Produce two documents before any conclusion is reached: a compensation schedule reconciled to the filings, and a duty record built from resolutions, approvals, and correspondence. A reviewer reading only the first sees a shareholder; reading only the second, they see assertions.
Together they describe an employed owner-manager, which is what the classification needs. The requirement remains one continuous year of qualifying employment with the organisation abroad within the three years preceding the filing, in a managerial, executive, or specialized-knowledge capacity, and shareholding does not establish it. Where the records show months in which nothing was directed and nothing was paid, put that to counsel rather than describing the period as continuous and hoping the point is never tested.