Read the general pathway comparison overview
Hypothetical example: a co-owner holding 30% of a family trucking company in Notre-Dame-du-Mont-Carmel could be transferred to run its U.S. terminal under L-1A, or could use his own savings to buy a small U.S. carrier under E-2. His stake in the Canadian company decides neither case. L-1A depends on the corporate relationship and his managerial year; E-2 on his citizenship, his money at risk and his control of the business he buys.
L-1A: the stake does not disqualify him, and it does not help him
An owner of the Canadian company can be an L-1A transferee; ownership does not bar the category. What matters is that the U.S. terminal is a qualifying organization of the Canadian carrier, that both are doing business, that he has one continuous year abroad within the last three in a managerial, executive or specialized-knowledge capacity, and that the U.S. role is primarily managerial. A 30% shareholder who runs the fleet's maintenance function and directs the shop staff can document that year through payroll and duty statements. The petition is filed by the U.S. subsidiary, his salary comes from it, and his status ends if the employment ends. The L-2 spouse may work. The limit is seven years.
E-2: his money and his control of a different business
Buying a small U.S. carrier for himself is a separate set of facts. He must be a Canadian citizen; the purchased carrier must be at least 50% Canadian-owned, which sole ownership satisfies; the purchase price must be substantial relative to the cost of that carrier, irrevocably committed and traced to a lawful source such as his documented savings or dividends from the family company; the carrier must be real, operating and non-marginal, with present or future capacity for more than a minimal living or a significant economic contribution; and he must develop and direct it. His 30% interest in the Canadian carrier adds nothing to the E-2 analysis. The E-2 spouse may work. The visa is renewable while the business qualifies, with no direct route to permanent residence.
Choose by which evidence exists, then keep the routes apart
If the family's U.S. terminal is established and his managerial year is documented, L-1A is provable at the employer's expense with no capital at risk. If he has the savings, has found a carrier to buy and is ready to leave the family company's payroll, E-2 becomes provable once the money is committed. Do not describe the family's terminal as his E-2 enterprise, since he neither owns 50% of it nor invested personally; and do not describe a carrier he bought alone as a corporate transfer. A person who transfers under L-1A and later buys his own carrier would change status to E-2 on new facts. Both routes authorize the spouse to work.
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.