Read the general business expansion overview
A new-office petition is approved for one year initially, and it is judged on two separate foundations. The American side needs secured premises and a credible plan to support the role within that year. The foreign side needs to be a real entity that was already doing business and will keep doing business after the transfer, because the qualifying relationship has to exist on both ends throughout.
The foreign entity is half the case
Hypothetical example: Adèle drills wells and installs water-treatment systems around Saint-Joachim-de-Shefford, has traded for eleven years as a sole proprietorship, and incorporates a Québec company six weeks before filing so that a U.S. subsidiary can be created under it. The American plan is sound and the Canadian foundation is thin, because the entity claimed as the parent is younger than the plan itself. The qualifying employment abroad has to have been performed for a qualifying organisation, and the parent has to be doing business. Restructuring shortly before filing is not fatal, but it has to be explained with the continuity documented: the trade that continued, the contracts that carried across, the payroll that persisted through the change of legal form.
Premises secured, not premises identified
The regulation asks for evidence that sufficient physical premises have been secured, and a letter of intent, a broker's listing or a handshake with a cousin who owns a yard does not meet it. A signed lease with a term, a rent figure and a description of the space does. Where the operation genuinely needs little space, say so and evidence what has been taken rather than pretending to a warehouse. The same discipline applies to the rest of the first-year plan: a hiring schedule with roles and dates, a funding source for the payroll, and a statement of what the transferee will be doing that is managerial or specialised rather than everything at once.
What the twelve-month review will ask
The initial year ends with an extension request that compares the plan to what happened. It asks whether the U.S. entity is doing business, whether the staffing described actually appeared, and whether the transferee's duties are now genuinely those of the classification granted. Build for that review from the first month by keeping invoices, bank records, payroll filings and an organisation chart that changes as people are hired. A file assembled in month eleven from memory reads as one assembled in month eleven. Where the plan slipped for ordinary commercial reasons, the honest account of what changed and what was achieved instead is stronger than a narrative shaped to match the original projection.
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.