It can, if the investor still develops and directs the enterprise. Delegating execution is different from surrendering control. Keep authority over budgets, pricing, key contracts, and the right to replace the operator, and be able to show it in the agreement and in the decisions the applicant actually makes.
Distinguish delegated tasks from surrendered control
Passive investment does not support E-2. Ask what the manager is authorized to sign without approval, what reporting the investor receives, how often the owner sets direction, and how the agreement ends. For a hypothetical Laval investor, one arrangement to assess could narrow the manager’s spending authority and reserve specified approvals to the owner; its adequacy still depends on the whole case.
Note also that owning the company does not by itself authorize the investor to perform work in the United States. Hypothetical example: a toxicology laboratory’s operating agreement lists reserved matters requiring owner consent, and the list stops at capital expenditure. Pricing, key hires and client contracts therefore sit with the operator by default, which is a structure worth reviewing before signature rather than explaining afterwards.
Ask counsel to read the reserved-matters list, the spending thresholds and the removal right together, because those three clauses describe the control the file will have to demonstrate. A clause that looks reasonable in isolation can remove the removal right entirely once read with the others.