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.
Choosing between a port-of-entry request and an employer petition
Hypothetical example: Malik is an urban planner in Innisfil whose American employer wants him in place within three weeks. As a Canadian citizen he can generally request TN classification at a port of entry with the required documentation, or the employer can file a petition with USCIS instead. The two routes need overlapping but not identical preparation, and the choice affects how the documents are assembled, who controls the timing, and what happens if an officer wants more information on the day. Hypothetical example: Priya, a meteorological technician, must decide whether her employer can supply a detailed role letter before a fixed project date. The concrete decision is whether the employer can stand behind a precise letter now, or whether an I-129 process gives the business time to assemble the same facts. Do not use a quick travel date to excuse an incomplete explanation of the professional duties, employer control, or credentials.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- The two channels ask for the same facts in different ways
- Build the file for the harder setting
- The employer's own preparation decides the timeline
What an employer needs to understand about a permanent resident's citizenship
Hypothetical example: Ade is a citizen of Ghana with Canadian permanent residence, working as an occupational therapist at a clinic in Innisfil. An American health group has offered him a role and its recruiter, seeing a Canadian address and a Canadian licence, has assumed the straightforward route applies. It does not. The professional route created by the USMCA depends on citizenship of Canada or Mexico, and a permanent resident card is evidence of Canadian immigration status rather than of Canadian citizenship. Hypothetical example: Farid, a Canadian permanent resident and wind-turbine technician, must decide whether his nationality supports the requested category before accepting the offer. The first decision is not where the applicant lives but which passport establishes nationality for the requested route. Canadian permanent residence may be important to life in Canada, yet it does not replace a citizenship requirement in U.S. classification rules.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- The document that decides it is the passport, not the licence
- Permanent residence is real status, in a different country
- Ask what the employer is actually willing to do
How much is substantial when the business itself is inexpensive
Hypothetical example: Camille and Théo run a residential cleaning franchise from Innisfil and are looking at a small American service business whose total acquisition and start-up cost is low. They assume a low price means an easy application. The substantiality requirement is proportional rather than fixed: the investment is weighed against the total cost of purchasing or establishing that particular enterprise, so an inexpensive business is expected to be funded to a correspondingly high degree, leaving very little room for the buyer to hold capital back. Hypothetical example: Laila, a mobile-laundry operator, must decide whether to release the final equipment payment now or preserve a contract condition tied to the immigration result. The practical decision is whether the proposed payment is sufficiently tied to an operating enterprise to accept the loss risk, or whether the transaction terms need revision before money moves. An E-2 investment is tested against the cost of this business, not a fixed public minimum.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Proportion, not a threshold number
- Held-back capital is the common miscalculation
- A cheap business still has to be a real one
Why a coworking desk rarely satisfies a first-year office petition
Hypothetical example: an Innisfil freight brokerage wants to open an American branch and send its operations director. To keep costs down the owners plan to use a coworking membership and a mail-forwarding address for the first year. A new-office petition is approved for an initial period of one year and is expected to be supported by evidence including secured physical premises for the new office, so the accommodation decision is not merely a facilities matter; it is part of what the petition has to show. Hypothetical example: Anders, a commercial-window distributor, must decide whether a virtual address can support the planned office before moving a manager. The business decision is whether the U.S. operation has enough committed premises, funding, and hiring detail to support the claimed role after the first year. Incorporation is only one early step; the file should describe an actual enterprise capable of developing into the proposed managerial or executive structure.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Secured premises is an evidentiary requirement, not a formality
- The premises should match the business being described
- Plan for what the first year has to produce
Thinking about a ten-year horizon rather than a first approval
Hypothetical example: Sylvie owns a group of physiotherapy clinics with a base in Innisfil and is planning an American operation she expects to run for the rest of her working life. Comparing an intracompany transfer with a treaty investment on the basis of which is easier to obtain first misses what usually matters more: the transfer route has hard maximum periods, while the treaty investment route can be extended repeatedly but provides no direct path to permanent residence on its own. Hypothetical example: Sora, owner of a hearing-aid retail chain, must decide whether her expansion depends on a related foreign company or on her own treaty investment. The central decision is whether the expansion rests on a relationship between operating companies or on the applicant’s treaty-national ownership and investment. L-1 requires a qualifying corporate relationship and qualifying foreign work; E-2 requires a real, non-marginal enterprise with committed capital exposed to loss and investor direction.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Two different shapes of time
- Sequence the decision, do not just compare the options
- The structural facts that decide availability
What children can and cannot do while a parent runs a treaty business
Hypothetical example: the Okonkwo family from Innisfil is preparing for a treaty investment in an American business. Their eldest is twenty, the youngest is fourteen, and the parents assume that whatever applies to them applies to the household. Dependent status is granted to a spouse and to unmarried children under twenty-one, the spouse's ability to work is treated differently from the children's, and school attendance is a separate question again from work authorization. Hypothetical example: Chioma, a marine-insurance broker, must decide whether her partner needs an independent work route while their eldest child approaches the age limit. The decision is whether each family member can meet the travel, school, work, and age consequences of the principal’s category. A derivative classification is not a blank authorization: work rules differ by category, and an unmarried child’s eligibility is tied to age.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- The spouse and the children are not in the same position
- Twenty-one is a date, not a negotiation
- Study is permitted, and it is not the same as work
Two routes measured against a teenager's remaining eligibility
Hypothetical example: Mr. Duarte, a building-supply wholesaler connected to Innisfil, has a seventeen-year-old daughter and wants whichever route reaches settled status while she can still be included. That makes the comparison a question about sequence and structure rather than about price. The investment classification carries a two-year conditional residence followed by a further filing, while the Gold Card program is described as routing through existing employment-based immigrant categories, whose own timelines and family provisions have to be verified. Hypothetical example: Luc, a desalination-equipment exporter, must decide whether a commercial-risk investment or the described gift-payment route better matches his family’s evidence and timing. The concrete decision is whether the applicant is prepared for commercial capital at risk and the job-creation evidence of EB-5, or is instead evaluating the described Gold Card payment. They are not interchangeable: EB-5 leads through conditional residence and later condition removal, while the described Gold Card model concerns a payment by the applicant to the U.S. government.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- The investment route has a two-stage structure
- The described alternative runs through other categories
- Ask the age question explicitly, in writing