Read the general pathway comparison overview
Companies that trade with each other are not automatically related for L purposes, and no amount of commercial closeness carries a supplier’s treaty nationality across to a U.S. enterprise. Settle the ownership and control facts on paper first, then read each route against them.
Map the qualifying entities for L
L begins with corporate structure, not with commercial closeness. Draw the ownership chart: who owns what proportion of the foreign employer, who owns the U.S. entity, and whether the two sit in a parent, branch, subsidiary or affiliate relationship — common ownership and control, not merely common interest. A distributor that buys a factory’s entire output, a franchisee bound by a detailed operating manual, and a joint-venture partner with a seat at the table are all partners in ordinary speech, and none of those arrangements creates the relationship the classification needs. If the chart produces no qualifying link, the L question ends there and no volume of contractual detail revives it. If it does produce one, the group must be doing business on both sides, and the transferee’s own qualifying year and proposed U.S. duties still have to be established separately from the company facts.
Assess E-2 nationality, control and capital independently
E-2 nationality attaches to people, and reaches the enterprise only through them. The principal investor must hold treaty-country nationality, and the enterprise ordinarily needs at least half its ownership in the hands of nationals of that same treaty country; a Canadian supplier’s nationality does not transfer to a U.S. company it merely sells to. Trace the shares through to the individuals who hold them instead of stopping at a corporate name, since a holding company in the chain can change the answer. The capital has to be the investor’s own, lawfully sourced, substantial for this business, irrevocably committed and genuinely at risk, and the enterprise real, operating and more than marginal. The investor must also develop and direct it, ordinarily through ownership of at least half of the enterprise or an equivalent measure of operational control — a brand licence or a supply contract sets the terms of a relationship but hands nobody control of a company.
Identify the evidence the transaction can actually provide
Once both charts exist the choice usually makes itself. Hypothetical example: a Canadian equipment installer holds an exclusive distribution agreement with a U.S. manufacturer and owns no shares in it; the agreement is genuine and valuable, and it supports neither an affiliate claim nor a treaty-nationality claim for that manufacturer. Describing the counterparty as an affiliate to reach L is a misstatement that also puts the accurate parts of the file in doubt. The reverse error is just as common: a real parent-subsidiary structure proves the corporate half of an L case and proves nothing about invested capital, so it cannot be borrowed to fill a gap in an E-2 record. Keep the underlying conditions visible on whichever side you land. For L, generally one continuous full-time qualifying year abroad within the preceding three years, in a managerial, executive or specialized-knowledge capacity, with the proposed U.S. role tested on its own; brief U.S. trips need not break continuity, though U.S. days do not count toward that year, and an owner or major stockholder adds temporary-service and later foreign-assignment evidence. For E-2, treaty nationality with generally at least 50% treaty-national ownership of the enterprise, capital genuinely at risk, non-marginality resting on more than a minimal family living or on significant economic contribution with future capacity realisable within roughly five years, and development and direction through at least half the ownership or comparable operational control.
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.