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.
Identify the real profession behind a consulting contract
A Petit-Saguenay applicant should use the actual services to choose the relevant TN profession rather than rely on the contract’s general consultant label. A first review should create a short crosswalk from each proposed duty to the chosen TN profession and its credential rule. Hypothetical example: A marine-acoustics analyst is offered a U.S. contract labelled “consulting.” The decision is whether the actual analytical duties and degree support a listed profession, rather than whether the commercial label sounds professional. Choose the occupation before drafting the evidence packet. A polished letter cannot cure duties that belong outside the selected professional category, and a complete file should make the relationship between the actual work and the required credential easy to follow.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Explain duties and deliverables accurately
- Establish the particular qualifications and lawful arrangement
Distinguish Canadian residence from qualifying citizenship
A Petit-Saguenay resident’s contract or family funding arrangement does not determine the nationality requirements of a US category. The first decision is which person’s nationality is legally relevant to the chosen route, then which document proves it. Hypothetical example: A Canadian permanent resident who designs precision-agriculture models holds a U.S. offer. The offer and Canadian residence do not answer TN citizenship; the passport and the occupation’s rule do. Using a residence card, tax record, or local address as a proxy for citizenship creates an avoidable error. Choose the route only after matching the relevant person’s nationality, corporate connection, investment facts, or family relationship to the rule that actually governs the category.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Check the applicant’s actual nationality
- Review other options without assuming a replacement
Explain genuine spousal funding without changing its terms
A Petit-Saguenay investor should show the actual entitlement and path of family resources used in the US enterprise. A first review should reconcile every transfer with its source document and identify when the money became committed to the enterprise. Hypothetical example: The owner of a commercial mushroom-substrate producer uses proceeds from a jointly owned sale. The decision is whether the sale, ownership, transfer, and right to use the proceeds are documented before the business pays suppliers. The chronology should be prepared before the first filing, because later explanations are tested against the dates, account records, and signed terms already in existence. A credible plan makes clear which funds are truly committed and which remain available only for personal use.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Identify ownership and transfer rights accurately
- Apply the complete treaty-investor conditions
Support each manager’s actual role in a shared launch
A Petit-Saguenay company proposing more than one transferee should explain individual duties and the real allocation of supporting resources. A first review should test the proposed office against a hiring sequence, premises evidence, financial capacity, and each transferee’s distinct qualifying role. Hypothetical example: A dental-device calibration company wants to send two leaders to open its U.S. operation. The decision is whether one has the managerial or executive case a new office requires and whether the second person’s specialized knowledge is separately documented.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Describe shared and separate responsibilities
- Check each foreign history and the new-office conditions
Compare an individual transfer with a family-funded investment
A Petit-Saguenay applicant should distinguish the qualifying employment case from the legal and financial terms of an E-2 contribution. The first review should compare the applicant’s employment history and related-company evidence with the investment’s ownership, source, risk, and operating role. Hypothetical example: An industrial-refrigeration supplier can either transfer its operations director or fund a new U.S. venture. The decision turns on which existing record is stronger, not on a preference for the faster-looking process. If L-1 is selected, the file must stand on the qualifying employment and organizational evidence. If E-2 is selected, it must stand on the investor’s own qualifying ownership, committed funds, risk, and operating role. Mixing the two narratives can obscure the condition that decides the case.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Use the applicant’s own employment record
- Use the real contribution and enterprise ownership
Keep shared resources separate from individual rights
Petit-Saguenay families should assess each person’s work authorization, derivative eligibility and actual funding role separately. A first review should list each family member’s proposed U.S. activity, relationship to the principal, age, marital status, and present immigration document. Hypothetical example: The spouse of a wind-turbine maintenance planner wants to take paid safety-training work while a teenage child helps with the family business. The decision is whether either activity is authorized for that person, rather than whether the family shares the principal’s plan. The family should decide in advance who will work, study, travel, or merely accompany the principal, and then preserve the documents for that individual role. An informal expectation that a relative will help can become an immigration issue when the assistance looks like regular productive work.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Establish work permission independently of family support
- Separate derivative evidence from jobs and tax assumptions
Apply the actual job rules and the current programme terms
A Petit-Saguenay investor should distinguish a qualifying EB-5 job count from payroll hours and current Gold Card terms from a future programme’s advertised benefits. A first review should produce two separate checklists: one for the EB-5 commercial enterprise, capital, jobs, and conditional-residence record, and one for the Gold Card gift and underlying immigrant classification. Hypothetical example: A cold-chain warehouse developer can fund a project or make a Gold Card gift. The decision is whether the project can satisfy the job and at-risk requirements, not whether both payments look large.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Count the jobs the EB-5 evidence supports
- Use Gold Card’s actual gift and tax information
- Use residence events instead of financial assumptions