Read the general pathway comparison overview
Suppose an applicant can either transfer within an existing company group or buy assets for a personally directed US business. A Cap-Acadie planning file should describe both transactions accurately before choosing which immigration requirements to assess.
Draw the employer relationship for the transfer proposal
Name the foreign employer, proposed US employer and the ownership or control link between them. L-1 requires a qualifying relationship, qualifying foreign employment and an eligible US managerial, executive or specialized-knowledge assignment. The group must keep doing business in the United States and abroad. A profitable foreign company does not satisfy these conditions merely by introducing the applicant to an unrelated US purchaser. Identify whether the proposed transaction changes the companies themselves or only transfers selected equipment, contracts or other assets.
Reconcile the purchase price with the E-2 investment
For E-2, distinguish the seller’s valuation from money or other qualifying capital actually committed by the investor. Trace lawful source and path, contractual obligations and the exposure to loss. The investment must be substantial in relation to the enterprise, without a universal dollar minimum. At least 50% of the enterprise must have the relevant treaty-country nationality, and the investor must have qualifying treaty nationality and develop and direct a real, nonmarginal business. An appraisal can inform the purchase discussion; it does not turn an uncommitted amount into invested funds.
Compare the work that would start after authorization
Write a short description of the applicant’s first responsibilities under each proposal. For the group transfer, show how the duties fit the claimed L classification. For the acquisition, explain how ownership or control enables development and direction and how the operating plan supports nonmarginality. Ask what happens if only one transaction closes or the employer changes. Permission connected to one arrangement does not authorize unrestricted work for the other. The comparison is useful only if it identifies the actual employer, enterprise and capital commitments rather than treating the two labels as interchangeable options.
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.