It can. The subsidiary definition expressly includes fifty-percent ownership of a 50/50 joint venture when the parent has equal control and veto power. The share split alone does not decide the issue; the governing documents must establish the required control rights.
Partnership and qualifying relationship are different ideas
Take the constitutional documents and answer three narrow questions: who owns what percentage, who has the right to direct the entity's affairs, and whether each fifty-percent owner has equal control and veto power. The regulation expressly recognizes a 50/50 joint venture as a subsidiary when those equal control and veto rights exist. If the documents instead leave one party without the necessary control, or reserve practical control elsewhere, the relationship may fail.
This is therefore not a question about whether the venture feels like a group, and an even split is not disqualifying on its own. It is a document-specific control analysis that should be done with corporate and immigration counsel while the agreement is still being drafted. Hypothetical example: Asha directs procurement for a maker of automated grain-sorting equipment and is proposed as head of its American affiliate.
A first review should produce an organization chart for both companies, ownership records, and a calendar showing at least one continuous qualifying year abroad during the relevant three-year lookback. The job description must show authority over managers, a function, or key policy rather than simply a senior title. Start with corporate records because they settle the relationship before anyone debates duties.
Petitions weaken when a manager is described mainly as the person who personally completes operational tasks, or when the claimed foreign service has unaddressed gaps.