Read it.
Use it.
Focused guides for the questions that need more than a quick answer. Each includes a worksheet to prepare your next conversation.
Guides for your next decision.
Build a TN employer evidence brief before drafting the letter
Read & prepare Applicant planningKeep an L-1A new-office record from approval to extension
Read & prepare Applicant planningCompare the E-2 evidence for a startup and a business purchase
Read & prepare U.S. destination planningCanadian RN planning for New York State
Read & prepare U.S. destination planningCanadian RN planning for California
Read & prepareSeven decisions, answered before you prepare.
Why Canadian permanent residence does not establish TN eligibility
TN classification is available to citizens of Canada or Mexico; permanent residence in Canada, without Canadian citizenship, does not meet that requirement. Applicants who hold Canadian permanent resident status but are citizens of another country need to look at the question through their own citizenship, not their Canadian residency. Three further conditions apply once citizenship is settled. The occupation must be one of the listed USMCA professions, the applicant must personally hold the qualification that entry specifies, and the employment must be prearranged with a United States employer or entity, since the category does not permit work for the applicant's own account.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Confirm which document actually proves citizenship
- Work through a common misunderstanding
- Identify the right basis to evaluate instead
Coordinating a remote consultation among several decision-makers on a PR-versus-citizenship question
When a consultation involves several remote decision-makers, such as an applicant, an employer contact, and outside counsel, the distinction between Canadian permanent residence and citizenship needs to be recorded once in a shared document rather than explained separately to each person, because inconsistent understanding among the group is what usually causes a route to be selected incorrectly. The distinction itself is worth writing into that record in plain terms. Citizenship of Canada or Mexico is what a TN request depends on; permanent residence is a residency status and does not supply it. The L categories turn on the employment relationship rather than nationality, and E-2 turns on treaty nationality, so the same person can be eligible under one heading and not another.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Put the status fact in one shared record
- Assign one person to hold the document
- Reconcile disagreements before the file is prepared
Coordinating a work visa plan across several decision-makers remotely
A visa plan that depends on several people who are not in the same room, and may not be in the same country, needs a clear map of who controls each piece of evidence before a remote consultation can be productive. This comes up often in a corporate transfer, where the applicant, the foreign entity and the U.S. entity each hold information the others cannot supply. It is worth stating the underlying conditions each route imposes, since a coordination plan is only useful if the parties know what they are collecting toward. The L categories require a qualifying corporate relationship, one continuous year of qualifying employment abroad within the preceding three years, and a managerial, executive or specialized knowledge role; E-2 requires treaty nationality, capital irrevocably committed and at risk, and an investor who develops and directs.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Map who controls each piece of required evidence
- Set a single point of contact for consolidating documents
- Confirm the corporate relationship and role before scheduling review
Coordinating an L1 qualifying-relationship review across several decision-makers
When a foreign company's ownership or governance involves multiple decision-makers who cannot meet in person, the L1 qualifying-relationship evidence has to be gathered through structured remote coordination rather than assumed from informal conversation. Identify who can actually confirm each fact before treating any answer as final. The requirements those confirmations have to reach are worth stating, because coordination is only as useful as the target it aims at. A qualifying parent, branch, subsidiary or affiliate relationship must exist; the transferee must have completed one continuous year of qualifying employment abroad within the preceding three years; and the role must be managerial, executive or involve specialized knowledge. Where the United States entity is new, the initial admission is limited to one year.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Identify who holds authority over each fact
- Reconcile conflicting accounts before filing
- Formalize verbal agreements into corporate records
Comparing L1 and E2 when several decision-makers are involved remotely
When a decision involves several stakeholders participating remotely — a foreign parent company's leadership, a local business partner, an applicant relocating — the comparison between L1 and E2 has to account for who controls which piece of evidence and who can commit to it. L1 evidence usually sits with corporate officers on both sides of the relationship. E2 evidence usually sits with whoever controls the investment funds and the business plan. Remote coordination works best when each stakeholder's role in the file is defined early. The two categories also differ in what must keep being true, which is worth agreeing among stakeholders before either is chosen. L-1A permits a maximum period of stay of seven years and L-1B five, and both depend on the qualifying relationship persisting. E-2 has no equivalent maximum but requires treaty ownership, capital that remains at risk and the investor's control to continue throughout.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Assign ownership of each evidentiary piece
- Resolve control and direction questions before drafting
- Build a single coordination record
How to run a remote family visa consultation with several decision-makers involved
A remote consultation involving an applicant, a spouse, an employer contact and possibly a corporate parent works only if one person owns each decision. Without that, questions circulate without being answered and documents get produced twice or not at all. The household's own position needs an owner in that structure too, since dependent questions are the ones most often left to the end. Dependent status generally extends to a spouse and unmarried children under twenty-one, and what a spouse may do for work differs by category, so the answer has to come from the same source as the principal's rather than from a colleague's experience.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Assign a single owner to each open question
- Structure the remote review so nothing is assumed reviewed
- Keep one authoritative record across all parties
How to run a remote EB-5 versus Gold Card comparison with several decision-makers
When several family members or business partners are weighing in remotely, the comparison between EB-5 and the Gold Card needs a shared, written framework, since the two paths allocate cost, risk, and dependent inclusion differently. A remote setting makes it easier for one decision-maker's assumptions to go unchallenged, so the figures and requirements should be laid out the same way for everyone. The two routes differ in kind, and saying so once to the whole group prevents most of the confusion. EB-5 places capital at risk in a new commercial enterprise and depends on that enterprise creating qualifying jobs, with conditional residence followed by a petition to remove conditions. The other route involves payments made by the applicant to the United States government, which return nothing and do not by themselves establish eligibility.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Put the cost structure in front of every decision-maker the same way
- Assign a single point of confirmation for eligibility facts
- Confirm who is included as a dependent before finalizing either plan