Read the general business expansion overview
A Saint-Constant group may propose a U.S. manager who will rely partly on people elsewhere in the organization. Describe the real support and responsibilities rather than assuming that a list of remote staff automatically establishes the managerial role.
Identify the work and the people responsible for it
For L-1A, the U.S. role must be primarily managerial or executive. Explain who performs the underlying tasks and what authority the transferee exercises. A function manager manages an essential function rather than merely performing it. Support should be described as it actually exists, without inventing a headcount or treating a foreign staff list as the whole analysis. Write the transferee's own week beside that plan: the recurring decisions they will make, the approvals needing their signature, and the tasks they would perform only if nobody else were available. That last list is the one to scrutinise, because a role built mostly out of it is being described as managerial while functioning as something else.
Retain the new-office criteria
U.S. doing business for less than one year falls within the new-office framework. New-office L-1A requires a qualifying continuous foreign managerial or executive year within the relevant three years, sufficient premises and evidence the operation can support the U.S. role within one year. New-office L-1B requires specialized knowledge, qualifying foreign employment, sufficient premises and financial ability to pay the employee and begin business.
Keep the organization and later evidence connected
A qualifying corporate relationship and required international business remain necessary; registration alone is not doing business. Initial new-office approval is limited to one year and does not guarantee extension. Owners or major stockholders also need temporary U.S. services and subsequent foreign-assignment evidence. Keep actual support records and decision responsibilities available for the later assessment.
The staffing document that answers the managerial question
The question here is not how many people exist somewhere in the group, but who will perform the underlying work so that the transferee does not have to. The document answering it is a staffing plan naming each role, where the person sits, who employs them, what they will do for the new operation, and from what date. Names may be withheld where a role is unfilled, but the employer and the start date cannot, because those are what make the role real. A weak version of this document is an organisational chart with boxes and titles: it shows a structure someone drew and does not say who pays anyone or when they begin. Where support comes from staff employed elsewhere in the group, add the arrangement governing it, since work performed by another entity's employees needs a basis someone can point to. New-office approval is generally granted for an initial year, so the plan should show what the operation will look like at the end of that year and which hires must happen before then. Hypothetical example: a new United States operation in metal fabrication and tooling lists eight supporting staff, and the plan becomes credible only once each role is tied to an employer and a start date.
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?Why does an L-2 spouse’s admission record matter for work?Editorial source review: 2026-09-07. General preparation guidance, not an individual assessment.