IN THIS GUIDE · Establishing which periods count as qualifying employment abroad when the person previously worked with the same organisation as an independent contractor
Start with the L-1B eligibility and application overview
Map the working relationship period by period
Set out the whole history in date order: who engaged the person, who paid them, through what entity, and under what agreement. Note the point at which the arrangement changed and whether anything else changed with it, such as the entity involved or the country of work. Contractors often work through their own company or through an intermediary, and that structure matters to the analysis. Record it plainly rather than summarising the whole period as service with the group. Record for each period who issued the payment, what document governed the arrangement, and in which country the work was performed, because those three facts drive the analysis and are the ones most often collapsed into a single line on a résumé. Where an intermediary company sat between the person and the organisation, name it and note whether it still exists.
Treat the contractor years as an open question
The general expectation is one continuous year of qualifying employment with the organisation within the relevant preceding three-year period, and the counting is case-specific. Whether any part of a contracting engagement counts depends on the actual relationship and needs assessment by a licensed United States immigration lawyer. Plan on the employment period that is clearly established, and treat anything earlier as something that might help rather than something the case relies on. Building the plan on the clearly established employment has a practical benefit beyond caution: it produces a date the business can work with. If the earlier period is later found to assist, the position improves; if it is not, nothing has to be rearranged. Presenting the reverse of that, a plan that depends on the contested period, means a single adverse view resets the whole schedule.
Document what the conversion actually changed
Gather the agreements covering both phases, invoices or payroll records, tax documentation from the relevant jurisdiction, and organisational charts showing where the person sat before and after. A letter from the manager describing supervision, tools, direction and integration during each phase is often more useful than the contracts alone. Where records were kept by an intermediary company, start requesting them early, since those relationships may have ended. Ask the manager to describe each phase separately rather than writing one account of the whole relationship, since the contrast between the phases is what the assessment needs. Who set priorities, whose systems and equipment were used, whether the person attended internal meetings, how absence was handled and how the work was invoiced or paid are all ordinary facts, and a description that answers them for both phases is more useful than one that emphasises continuity.
Plan around the date the qualifying period is complete
Once the clearly qualifying employment is identified, discuss when the requirement can be satisfied and build the assignment plan around that analysis. Confirm citizenship, current residence, existing status and prior immigration history separately; they may affect procedure, admissibility and the broader eligibility assessment. None should be inferred from an address or community name. L-1B is not limited to one nationality, but every applicant still needs an individual review. It is worth stating the separate limits that also apply, since a business planning several transfers will want them in view: L-1B permits a maximum period of stay of five years and L-1A seven, and time already spent in L status counts. Confirm each individual's citizenship, current status and prior immigration history separately as well, because none of those follow from where the person lives or from the organisation's experience with an earlier transfer.
Sources reviewed 2026-09-07. This guide covers a preparation focus; it is not an individual eligibility assessment.