Read it.
Use it.

TN documents for a land surveyor assignment

Land surveyor qualifies through a baccalaureate or licenciatura degree, or a state, provincial, or federal license. A Canadian provincial land surveying license can support the license path, but the license must specifically authorize land surveying practice, not simply reflect membership in a related professional body.

An applicant holds membership in a provincial surveying association but has not completed the additional requirements for a full commissioned land surveyor license in that province. Gather documentation that shows the license itself, and what it authorizes, rather than relying on association membership alone as if it were equivalent to licensure. Ask the licensing body for a current statement of what the licence authorises, not merely that the person is a member. Association membership and a commissioned licence are different things, and a file resting on the first while claiming the second will be read closely. Where additional requirements remain outstanding, establish what they are, how long they take, and whether the employer's timetable can accommodate them, because that answer decides whether the licence path is available at all in the period that matters.

WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS

• Confirm what the license actually authorizes
• Or document the degree path clearly
• Match the employer letter to survey duties specifically

Read the full guide

Why a financing contingency changes how an investment-based plan should be documented

When a US plan depends on third-party financing, permanent residence or citizenship status tells you nothing about whether the underlying investment is actually at risk or qualifying. Both E-2 and EB-5 routes look closely at where the money comes from, and a financing contingency that is not yet secured changes what can honestly be represented in a filing.

A signed term sheet or conditional loan approval is not the same as capital that is actually at risk in the business. For E-2, the funds must be committed and irrevocable for the nonmarginality and control analysis to hold; for EB-5, the standard thresholds of $800,000 for a targeted employment or infrastructure project, or $1.05 million otherwise, along with the ten qualifying full-time jobs, depend on funds that are lawfully sourced and genuinely invested, not merely pledged. Distinguish a commitment from a transfer in every document the plan relies on. A signed term sheet or a conditional approval records an intention; capital at risk is money that has left the applicant's control and entered the enterprise. Ask what conditions remain, who can waive them, and what happens if they are not met, then write those answers into the plan rather than describing the funding as settled. Residence or citizenship in Canada tells nobody anything about either question.

WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS

• Trace the funds, not just the commitment
• Separate loan-backed capital from personal capital
• Do not file on a contingency that has not closed

Read the full guide

When the E2 investment depends on third-party financing

E2 eligibility requires capital that is irrevocably committed and genuinely at risk in the enterprise. A financing arrangement can satisfy this, but the structure of the loan determines whether it does: financing secured against the applicant's own personal assets can qualify, while financing secured only against the business's own assets generally does not, because it does not put the applicant's own capital at risk.

WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS

• Test the security behind the loan
• Confirm funds are committed, not conditional
• Document the funds' path into the business

Read the full guide

Building an L1 new-office plan that depends on outside financing

When a proposed U.S. office's opening depends on financing from a third party, the qualifying corporate relationship and the financing arrangement need to be evaluated as two separate questions. Outside funding can support a credible business plan, but it does not itself establish the ownership or control link between the foreign and U.S. entities that an L1 case requires.

Verify that ownership or control between the foreign company and the new U.S. office rests on the corporate structure itself, such as shares held or a parent-subsidiary arrangement, rather than on the funder having any stake in either entity. If the third-party financier is acquiring equity, map out exactly how that changes the ownership picture, since new equity holders can dilute or complicate the very relationship the case depends on. Hypothetical example: a third-party financier wants equity in the new United States entity rather than a loan. That changes the ownership picture, which is the very thing the case depends on, so map the resulting share register before agreeing anything. The qualifying relationship must rest on the corporate structure itself, such as shares held or a parent and subsidiary arrangement, and new equity holders can dilute or complicate it in ways nobody intended during the negotiation.

WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS

• Confirm the qualifying relationship does not depend on the financing
• Show the financing is real and sufficiently committed
• Plan for what happens if financing falls through

Read the full guide

When the E2 investment depends on financing that isn't finalized

An E2 plan built on third-party financing that has not closed is not yet a demonstrated at-risk investment, and that gap does not have an L1 equivalent since L1 is not financing-based. Treat unfinalized financing as a reason to hold the E2 filing, not a detail to work around.

E2 requires the applicant's investment to be committed or irrevocably committed and genuinely at risk in a business the applicant controls or actively directs. If a meaningful share of the capital depends on a loan or outside investor that has not closed, the investment is not yet demonstrably at risk in the way the category requires, regardless of how firm the verbal commitment feels. Understand why financing status matters to only one of the two routes. The treaty investor route requires the applicant's capital to be committed or irrevocably committed and genuinely at risk in an enterprise the applicant controls or actively directs, so capital depending on a loan that has not closed is not yet demonstrably at risk however firm the verbal commitment feels. The intracompany route does not turn on outside funding at all, which is why comparing the two on financing grounds compares different kinds of risk.

WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS

• Understand why financing status matters for E2 specifically
• Recognize that L1 does not carry this problem
• Decide what to do while financing is pending

Read the full guide

How third-party financing affects an E2 investment plan

An E2 plan that depends on financing from a relative, partner, or lender needs the financing structure examined before any family or timeline planning proceeds. The investment must be genuinely at risk and committed, and how it is financed can determine whether it qualifies at all.

Personal borrowing can be included in an E-2 investment when the investor bears the risk, including a loan secured by the investor's own personal assets or an unsecured loan on the investor's personal signature. Debt secured by the treaty enterprise's assets cannot count toward the investment, even if personal assets also secure it. Review the actual loan and collateral terms; eligible loan proceeds must still satisfy the other investment requirements. Read the loan and the collateral terms before any household planning proceeds, because the structure can determine whether the investment qualifies at all. Personal borrowing can be included where the investor bears the risk, including a loan secured by the investor's own personal assets or an unsecured loan on the investor's personal signature. Debt secured by the treaty enterprise's assets cannot count toward the investment even where personal assets also secure it, and eligible loan proceeds must still satisfy the other investment requirements.

WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS

• Confirm the investment is genuinely at risk
• Document the financing structure clearly
• Assess the timing dependency separately from eligibility

Read the full guide

Evaluating third-party financing against EB-5 and Gold Card fund requirements

A plan that depends on borrowed or third-party funds needs to be tested against each route's rules on capital source before it can be treated as a feasible path, because EB-5 and Gold Card both scrutinize where the money actually came from, not just whether the correct amount arrives on time.

EB-5 permits loan-based funding in some circumstances, but the borrower generally must be personally and primarily liable for the debt, and the loan cannot be secured by the assets of the new commercial enterprise itself. A financing structure where the project or the enterprise effectively guarantees the loan does not meet the at-risk standard, so the underlying loan documents need review before the capital is treated as qualifying. Test the borrowing against the at-risk rule first. Loan-based funding is permitted in some circumstances, but the borrower generally must be personally and primarily liable for the debt, and the loan cannot be secured by the assets of the new commercial enterprise itself. A structure in which the project or the enterprise effectively stands behind the loan does not meet that standard, so the loan documents need reading before the capital is treated as qualifying rather than afterwards.

WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS

• Test the financing against EB-5's at-risk rule
• Test the financing against Gold Card's gift and contribution structure
• Decide what must be resolved before either filing

Read the full guide