Read the general pathway comparison overview
A Central Saanich applicant may manage a function using outside services or direct an enterprise with operating reserves. The assessment should identify what is actually performed and what is actually committed. The decision is which money will actually leave the owner’s control. Reserves kept in a Canadian account can fund a subsidiary that transfers a head grower under L-1B, but they are not an E-2 investment until they are irrevocably committed to a US enterprise. Match the route to the funds the owner is genuinely prepared to spend and risk.
Evaluate the transfer evidence
L-1 requires qualifying organizations, foreign service and managerial/executive or specialized-knowledge duties. Outsourcing expense is not by itself evidence that operations are covered, and earlier familiarity does not automatically supply the employment year.
Evaluate the treaty investment
E-2 requires at least 50% relevant national enterprise ownership, direction, substantial at-risk capital with lawful source/path and a real nonmarginal business. Working capital needs an account of actual commitment rather than a categorical assumption.
Resolve the real dependencies
Identify any missing support, future hiring or uncommitted funds honestly. Neither a service contract nor an account label substitutes for all the conditions of the proposed immigration route.
Hypothetical example: a greenhouse grower’s protocols, transferred or invested
Hypothetical example: a Central Saanich greenhouse operation grows tomatoes and cucumbers under its own climate and nutrient protocols and holds a substantial operating reserve. The owner sees two ways into the United States. Route one: the Canadian company forms a US subsidiary, leases greenhouse space and transfers the head grower under L-1B, on the basis that his advanced knowledge of the company’s propagation and integrated pest-management procedures is specialized knowledge rather than general horticultural skill. The subsidiary must show premises and the financial ability to pay him and commence business, the first approval lasts one year, and his L-1B time is capped at five years. Route two: the owner personally buys an existing US greenhouse business under E-2. There the reserve is the problem, not the answer: funds that remain in the Canadian account are not at risk, and the application must show money already spent on the purchase, equipment or lease and placed beyond recall. She must hold at least half of the enterprise or otherwise control it, develop and direct it, and show it is more than a means of supporting herself. E-2 provides no direct path to permanent residence.
Ask the accountant and the lawyer these questions
Ask the accountant which reserves the company can commit to a subsidiary without starving the Canadian operation, because the group must keep operating in both countries for the L-1B route to survive its extension. Ask the lawyer whether the head grower’s knowledge is documented in written procedures and training records that show it is the company’s, not the trade’s. Ask what the E-2 purchase agreement lets the owner recover if the application fails, since escrow released only on approval is a recognized way to commit funds while limiting loss. Then choose the route whose conditions the existing records already satisfy.
What else is on your mind?
Does being a business owner or director qualify me for L-1A?What employment history should an L-1 transfer review cover?What makes a new-office L-1A case different?How should an owner compare L-1 and E-2?Editorial source review: 2026-09-07. General preparation guidance, not an individual assessment.