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.
A change in project duties deserves a fresh look at the TN profession
A La Prairie professional may receive a revised project description after preparing the application documents. Compare the actual new duties with the evidence already collected. An unchanged job title does not establish that the original professional analysis still fits. Put the two descriptions side by side in a table with one row per duty and mark each row unchanged, altered or new. What that produces is usually a short list rather than a rewritten job, and the short list is what the professional analysis has to be tested against.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Compare versions of the assignment
- Match the profession and qualifications honestly
- Resolve the change before relying on existing permission
A future Canadian citizenship ceremony is not the same as holding citizenship today
A La Prairie permanent resident may have a Canadian citizenship application underway while a U.S. employer hopes to set a start date. Describe the current nationality and stage accurately. A future milestone cannot be presented as a citizenship status already obtained. Write down two lines and date them: the citizenship the applicant holds today, and the stage the Canadian application has actually reached. Everything the employer is told should be traceable to one of those two lines rather than to an expected outcome.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Separate today’s evidence from an expected event
- Evaluate the U.S. category using current facts
- Update the evidence when the facts actually change
A franchise licence is one part of an E-2 case, not the whole business
A La Prairie investor may receive a franchise approval before choosing premises or committing the complete business budget. Distinguish permission to use the brand from the evidence that the actual enterprise and investment meet E-2 requirements. Read the franchise agreement with a pen and build three lists: what has been paid, what is contractually owed, and what is merely projected. Most of the confusion in these files comes from the first two being mixed with the third inside a single figure.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Identify what the franchise agreement actually grants
- Explain the operating business behind the brand
- Keep nationality and launch permission separate
A launch delayed by premises does not change the L evidence you need
A La Prairie company may have an otherwise developed U.S. expansion plan while its intended premises remain unresolved. Describe the actual access and operating arrangements, not the building you hope to occupy. Describe the space the company can actually occupy on the intended start date, with the document that proves it. Where that document is a letter of intent rather than a lease, say so, because the difference is visible to any reader who turns to the signature page.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Separate a proposed address from supported premises
- Connect the premises with the applicable category
- Keep company and role evidence alongside the lease
Decide who is applying before comparing an employee transfer with an investor case
A La Prairie group may discuss moving a senior employee while a different person supplies investment funds. Separate those roles. A proposal that mixes the employee’s experience and the shareholder’s nationality can hide which applicant actually meets which category. Name the applicant on the first page of the analysis and keep them there. Two people with different nationalities, different employment histories and different ownership interests cannot be merged into a single candidate, however closely they work together.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Map the transfer case to the employee
- Map the investment case to the correct person
- Make an applicant-by-evidence table
Different arrival dates require a plan for each family member’s status
A La Prairie household may plan for one parent to travel before a spouse and children. Separate bookings can make it easy to overlook the immigration document and status each person will actually use. Build one table for the household with a row per person: category, document, validity dates, intended arrival, and who is expected to work or study. A single sheet catches the mismatches that separate bookings hide.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Record each person’s basis and dates
- Check employment permission separately
- Reconcile the plan after actual admission
An investment recovery plan and a gift budget ask different financial questions
A La Prairie household comparing EB-5 with Gold Card should first distinguish money exposed to investment risk from a gift. Do not use an expected future repayment as though both pathways promise the same return. Write the two commitments as a single timeline of payments showing the date, the amount and whether it can be recovered, then read it as a household budget rather than as a comparison of programmes.
WHAT THIS GUIDE COVERS
- Understand the EB-5 capital arrangement
- Read the Gold Card sequence as a separate commitment
- Compare commitments without assuming future cash