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.
Documenting Repeated Short TN Turnaround Assignments Without Over-Claiming a Posting
Hypothetical example: a chemical engineer completes six-week turnaround assignments for the same U.S. plant three separate times in one year. TN is available only where the work falls in a USMCA Appendix 2 listed profession, such as the engineer entry, and a trade role on the same turnaround would not qualify however skilled it is. Each assignment should be documented as its own defined project with its own dates and scope, rather than summarized as one continuous engagement, so the pattern reads as repeated temporary entry tied to real project need rather than an undisclosed permanent posting.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Why the pattern itself draws scrutiny
- Documenting each assignment as its own project
- What not to claim, and what to say instead
A Pending Canadian Citizenship Application and an Approaching U.S. Start Date
Hypothetical example: an applicant's Canadian citizenship application is pending while a U.S. start date approaches, and TN eligibility requires Canadian citizenship, not permanent residence. What is true on the day of entry or filing decides the route; a pending application, however far along, does not itself establish citizenship, so the U.S. plan needs to be sequenced around the applicant's actual, current status.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Why the pending application does not itself help
- Routes that do not depend on citizenship timing
- Sequencing the U.S. start date around actual status
Whose Investment Is It When the Funds Sit in the Canadian Operating Company's Account
Hypothetical example: an investor plans to fund a U.S. E-2 enterprise with money currently sitting in their Canadian operating company's bank account, not in a personal account. E-2 status requires the investor's own investment, so the case needs to trace how ownership of that capital moves from the company to the investor personally, and then into the U.S. enterprise, rather than treating company funds and personal funds as interchangeable.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Why company funds are not automatically the investor's own investment
- Tracing ownership from the company to the investor
- What corporate investment structures require instead
What a New U.S. Office's One-Year Approval Actually Expects to Happen
Hypothetical example: a new U.S. office is approved under L-1 new-office rules, but in year one the transferee is the only worker at the location. A new-office petition is approved for one year on evidence of premises and capacity to support the role, and the extension that follows needs to show the office has grown toward what the approved role actually requires, not remain a one-person operation indefinitely.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- What the initial one-year approval is actually based on
- Why a still-solo office at extension time is a real risk
- Building toward genuine substance before the extension
Does an Equity Offer in the U.S. Entity Change Whether L-1 or E-2 Fits
Hypothetical example: an employee being transferred is also offered equity in the U.S. entity as part of the transfer package. An ownership stake does not automatically disqualify L-1 status, but it can shift the better-fitting category toward E-2 depending on how much control and risk actually comes with the equity, so the offer's real terms need to be examined rather than assumed to point one way.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Why equity alone does not rule out L-1
- When the equity stake starts pointing toward E-2 instead
- Reading the actual terms rather than the package label
Proving Each Relationship in a Blended Family With Incomplete Stepchild Records
Hypothetical example: a blended family applying for derivative status has incomplete records documenting a stepchild's relationship to the principal applicant's spouse. Each family member's eligibility depends on that specific relationship being proven with adequate documentation, and derivatives generally cannot work regardless of the category, so gaps in a stepchild's records need to be addressed directly rather than assumed to sort themselves out later in processing.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Why a stepchild relationship needs its own documentation
- Filling documentation gaps before filing
- What derivatives may and may not do once status is granted
If the U.S. Venture Loses Money: At-Risk Capital Versus a Non-Refundable Gift
Hypothetical example: a prospective applicant compares EB-5 and the Gold Card by asking what happens if the underlying U.S. venture loses money. An EB-5 investment is genuinely at risk, with no repayment guarantee, meaning the capital itself can be lost while conditional status still depends on jobs and compliance; a Gold Card gift is non-refundable from the outset and was never invested capital at risk in a venture in the first place, so the two downside scenarios are not comparable in the way they might first appear.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- EB-5's at-risk capital and what losing money actually means
- The Gold Card gift's different starting position
- Comparing the two downside scenarios honestly