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.
TN documents for a mathematician or statistician role
Mathematician, a category that includes statistician, requires a baccalaureate or licenciatura degree in mathematics, statistics, or a closely related quantitative field. Data-focused job titles have multiplied in recent years, and not all of them describe mathematics or statistics work in substance. Three conditions apply alongside the credential. The employment must be prearranged with a United States employer or entity, since the category does not permit an applicant to work for their own account; the applicant must be a citizen of Canada or Mexico; and the duties must genuinely be those of the listed profession rather than a differently shaped role that happens to carry a quantitative title.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Confirm the degree field connects to mathematics or statistics
- Test a data-oriented title against the duties
- Gather the full support package
Why the residence-versus-citizenship question resurfaces when a business plan changes
When a commercial plan changes during preparation, for example moving from a sole proprietorship to a corporate structure, the question of who holds treaty nationality and who holds only Canadian permanent residence needs to be revisited, not assumed to still hold. A structural change can shift which individual is actually the qualifying investor or employee. It is worth restating the point that most often survives a restructuring unexamined. Treaty nationality is a citizenship question, and Canadian permanent residence does not supply it however long it has been held. TN likewise requires citizenship of Canada or Mexico, while the L categories depend on the corporate relationship and the employment history rather than on nationality at all.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Reassess who the qualifying investor is
- Reassess nonmarginality after restructuring
- Check whether L1 assumptions still apply
How to handle changes to a business plan during E2 preparation
An E2 case rests on a treaty national committing qualifying capital that is at risk in a business the applicant will control and develop, and on that business being more than marginal. When the underlying commercial plan shifts while the application is being prepared, the question is not whether change is allowed but whether the investment commitment and the supporting evidence still describe the same business. The conditions the revised plan still has to satisfy are worth naming, since they are what any change is measured against: treaty nationality, capital that is substantial in proportion to the enterprise and irrevocably committed and at risk, an enterprise that is real, active and not marginal, and an investor who will develop and direct it. A change is significant precisely to the extent that it touches one of those.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Distinguish refinement from a different business
- Reconcile the investment commitment with the revised plan
- Update the evidence chain, not just the narrative
When the US business plan changes mid-preparation for an L1 filing
A commercial plan that shifts while an L1 new-office file is being assembled is common, but every material change has to be reflected consistently across the petition rather than left in an outdated draft. Treat the plan as a living document until the filing date, and lock it down before submission. The requirements a revised plan still has to reach are worth restating, since a change is only material by reference to them. A qualifying parent, branch, subsidiary or affiliate relationship must exist; the transferee must have completed one continuous year of qualifying employment abroad with a related entity within the preceding three years; and the role must be managerial, executive or involve specialized knowledge. Initial new office admission is limited to one year.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Distinguish refinement from a different business
- Update every document that references the old plan
- Reassess the office and staffing evidence against the new plan
When the business plan changes mid-preparation, which route holds up
A commercial plan that shifts during preparation — a change in scope, location, funding structure or staffing model — affects L1 and E2 differently because each category ties eligibility to a different part of the plan. E2 eligibility rests directly on the investment and the business itself, so a changed plan can alter whether the investment is still substantial or non-marginal. L1 eligibility rests on the corporate relationship and the applicant's role, so a changed business plan matters mainly if it changes that role or the structure connecting the two entities. The two also differ in what has to keep being true after a plan settles, which is worth agreeing before either route is chosen. The L categories are time-limited — seven years in total for L-1A and five for L-1B — and both fail if the qualifying relationship between the entities lapses. E-2 runs without a fixed ceiling, but only while treaty ownership, at-risk capital and the investor's control are all maintained.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Trace what actually changed
- Update the evidence file, not just the narrative
- Decide whether the change affects timing
How to handle an E2 business plan that changes while the case is being prepared
A business plan revised mid-preparation is common, but every change has to be tested against the same two questions the original plan had to answer: is the investment genuinely at risk and controlled by the applicant, and is the business more than marginal. A later version that looks more polished is not automatically a stronger case. It is worth setting out the conditions in full, since a revision is only material by reference to them: treaty nationality, capital substantial in proportion to the enterprise and irrevocably committed and at risk, an enterprise that is real, active and not marginal, and an investor who will develop and direct it. A polished later draft that no longer matches the contracts and payments is weaker than a plain earlier one that did.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Distinguish a refinement from a different business
- Re-test the investment and nonmarginality after each material change
- Keep a version history the file can stand behind
How to handle a commercial plan that changes while an EB-5 or Gold Card filing is prepared
A business plan that shifts during preparation matters much more for EB-5 than for a Gold Card contribution, because EB-5 eligibility is tied to the specific enterprise, its structure and its projected job creation. A contribution amount does not depend on a business plan at all. Before filing anything, the current version of the plan needs to match what will actually be invested and operated. The two routes differ in kind, which is why a changing plan reaches one and not the other. EB-5 asks for capital to be put and kept at risk in a new commercial enterprise that creates the qualifying jobs; residence begins on a conditional basis and a later petition removes the conditions. The alternative is a payment the applicant makes to the United States government: nothing comes back, and by itself it establishes no eligibility.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Re-test EB-5 eligibility against the revised plan, not the original one
- Recognize that a Gold Card contribution does not carry this exposure
- Keep the final plan and the filed evidence aligned