Read the general pathway comparison overview
Hypothetical example: two siblings in White City co-own an environmental remediation company. One will move to the United States to build the business there and plans to stay for good. Forming a U.S. subsidiary and transferring her on L-1A, or having her personally invest on E-2, looks like a corporate question, but the deciding factor is the horizon. L-1A ends at seven years and can lead to the EB-1 multinational-manager category; E-2 can be renewed indefinitely but has no direct path to permanent residence. The comparison should start from where she wants to be in ten years.
What each route requires from the same facts
For L-1A the U.S. company must be a subsidiary or affiliate of the Canadian one, both must trade, she needs one continuous year of managerial work with the Canadian company in the last three, and the U.S. role must be primarily managerial or executive. A new subsidiary means a new-office petition with one-year initial approval and evidence of premises and a plan to support the role within a year. For E-2 she must be a Canadian citizen rather than merely a resident, personally hold at least 50% of the U.S. enterprise or have operational control, and place funds irrevocably at risk in a substantial amount in a real business that is not marginal; the enterprise must be at least 50% owned by Canadian nationals. If both siblings are Canadian citizens, the sibling's ownership counts toward the enterprise-nationality test, while her own 50% stake supports the develop-and-direct requirement.
Where the routes diverge
L-1A carries a seven-year maximum and a well-worn path: after a year of managing the U.S. company, she may be eligible for an EB-1C immigrant petition as a multinational manager, which requires no labour certification and for which visa availability for Canadian-born applicants has generally been current. E-2 has no time cap and can be extended as long as the business qualifies, but it is a nonimmigrant status that assumes an intent to depart, and moving from it to permanent residence requires a separate basis. Both give the spouse work authorization incident to status and both let children study but not work. If permanence is the goal, L-1A with a subsidiary is usually the more direct road, provided the company will genuinely operate.
What to ask before choosing
Ask the accountant whether a U.S. subsidiary of the Canadian corporation or a personally owned U.S. company fits the family's tax position, because that answer sometimes settles the immigration one. Ask whether the Canadian company can spare her for a year of U.S. management without its own operations suffering, since the qualifying relationship requires both to keep trading. Ask whether she can commit personal capital of a substantial size, or whether the funding will come from the company, which points to L-1A. Ask how quickly the U.S. work will generate revenue, since a new-office L-1A must show operations at the one-year extension. Write the answers into a single comparison and choose the route the facts support, not the one that sounds simpler.
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.