Read the general pathway comparison overview
A Saanich applicant should distinguish authority exercised for a qualifying employer group from authority derived through personal investment in an enterprise. The decision that matters is the time horizon. An L-1A transfer through the employer’s group is capped at seven years and depends on the group continuing to operate on both sides of the border, while an E-2 investment can be renewed as long as the business qualifies but offers no direct path to permanent residence. Choose according to what the applicant intends to be doing in year eight.
Assess the L-1 proposal
Qualifying foreign employment, corporate relationships and actual managerial/executive or specialized-knowledge duties remain required. A launch title or planned handover cannot replace the substantive evidence.
Assess the E-2 proposal
At least 50% relevant treaty-country national enterprise ownership, development and direction, substantial at-risk capital with lawful source/path, and a real nonmarginal business remain necessary. Multiple citizenships require an accurate ownership account.
Compare effective responsibilities
Identify the actual employer or enterprise, duties and financial exposure. Permission under one arrangement is not unrestricted authorization to work in another business.
Hypothetical example: a clinic chain’s clinical director, transferred or invested
Hypothetical example: a Saanich physiotherapy chain with four clinics wants a US presence, and its clinical director has two ways to lead it. Route one: the chain forms a wholly owned US subsidiary, leases a clinic and transfers her as L-1A to manage it. Her qualifying year is clear, she has spent five continuous years on the Canadian payroll, but the new office must show premises and the ability to support a managerial role within twelve months, and the first approval lasts one year. Route two: she personally buys a majority stake in an existing US clinic with her own savings under E-2. Here the questions are different. She must own at least half or otherwise control the enterprise, her funds must be irrevocably committed before she applies, the clinic must be a real operating business that does more than support her, and she must develop and direct it. She may direct a clinic without treating patients, but the clinic’s revenue depends on state-licensed clinicians, so the nonmarginality case rests on the staff she employs. Under E-2 her spouse may work incident to status; under L-1A the same is true for an L-2 spouse.
Compare group support with personal exposure
Ask the employer whether it will capitalize and staff the subsidiary for a full year regardless of the petition’s outcome, because a new office cannot be a plan on paper. Ask the seller of the US clinic what the purchase price buys, since goodwill and a lease assignment count differently from cash left in reserve. Ask the lawyer how each route ends: L-1A time may later support a multinational-manager immigrant petition if its own conditions are met, whereas E-2 must be renewed and never converts on its own. Then compare the applicant’s personal financial exposure in each route honestly.
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.