Sending employees to the United States: a guide for Canadian businesses

1. Start with the assignment, not the visa name

Before selecting a classification, write down what the employee will actually do in the United States. “Business development,” “consulting” and “technical support” are descriptions that can cover very different activities. Negotiating a contract, preparing a paid engineering design and installing machinery should not be treated as interchangeable merely because they concern the same customer.

A useful assignment description identifies the legal entities involved; the employee's citizenship; the daily duties and expected deliverables; each work location; the person directing the work; the employment and payment arrangements; and the proposed start and end dates. Separate the work into phases if the employee will first attend meetings and later deliver the project. Review each phase before committing to it.

This is an initial screening table, not a finding of eligibility. The tests and qualifications are explained below. Authorities: 22 C.F.R. § 41.31; 8 C.F.R. §§ 214.2(b), (e), (l), and 214.6. [3, 4, 7, 10, 12]

Citizenship, a visa and permission to work are different questions

Canadian citizens generally do not require a visa for many temporary purposes, including ordinary TN and L-1 travel. They still have to qualify for the requested classification and be admissible. E-1 and E-2 are important exceptions: Canadian citizens ordinarily require the appropriate E visa to seek admission in those classifications. Canadian permanent residence does not give another country's citizen the Canadian visa exemption or make that person eligible for TN. Their own citizenship and circumstances must be considered. [2, 7]

A petition approval, a visa and an admission record serve different functions. A petition addresses the classification requested; a visa generally permits travel to seek admission; U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) determines admission. The Form I-94 records the admitted classification and period of stay where issued. An employer should therefore ask both whether the assignment qualifies and which steps are required before this particular employee may begin it. [2, 15]

2. Business visitors: where the boundary lies

The statutory foundation is Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 101(a)(15)(B), which excludes a person coming to perform skilled or unskilled labour from the ordinary business-visitor definition. The implementing visa regulation recognizes legitimate commercial or professional activities but excludes local employment and labour for hire. Meetings, commercial negotiations and conferences may fit; the fact that a visit benefits a Canadian business does not make every activity permissible. [1, 3]

What the leading decisions illustrate

In Matter of Hira, the visitor took measurements and orders in the United States for clothing manufactured by his employer in Hong Kong. The decision considered the foreign business, the place where profits accrued and the temporary character of the visits. The U.S. activity was part of the international commercial transaction described in the evidence. The decision does not create a general rule that anyone paid abroad may work in the United States. [5, pp. 826-830]

Matter of Neill illustrates the other side. A Canadian engineer repeatedly entered the United States in connection with services for U.S. clients. The Board concluded that he was extending his professional practice into the United States, rather than qualifying for the business-visitor category on the facts presented. His continuing Canadian residence did not resolve that problem. The case predates today's USMCA professional provisions; it helps explain the ordinary B-1 boundary, rather than deciding whether a modern TN application or a specific treaty provision would succeed. [6, pp. 332-334]

For an employer, these decisions support a practical distinction: a trip to secure or discuss business may require a different analysis from a trip to perform the service the customer bought. Neither a short visit nor Canadian payroll is a substitute for that analysis. A five-day assignment can still involve work that requires a classification authorizing it. [1, 3, 5, 6]

After-sales service: a real exception with specific conditions

The USMCA business-visitor regulation expressly addresses certain after-sales services. Under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(b)(4)(i)(F), the provision covers installers, repair and maintenance personnel, and supervisors who possess specialized knowledge essential to the seller's contractual obligation. The work or training must be under a warranty or other service contract incidental to the sale of commercial or industrial equipment or machinery, including computer software, purchased from an enterprise outside the United States. The equipment or software must have been manufactured outside the United States, and the service must fall within the life of the relevant agreement. The other B-1 requirements, including remuneration requirements, continue to apply. [4]

That language gives HR concrete questions to investigate. What was sold? Who sold it? Where was it manufactured? Which contractual clause requires the service? Why does this employee have the knowledge needed to fulfil that obligation? An unrelated service engagement does not become after-sales service simply because the supplier is Canadian or because a customer describes the work as installation.

Building and construction work is separately excluded by 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(b)(5). The regulation distinguishes performing that work from qualifying supervision or training of others. A machinery project that includes site construction therefore needs a task-by-task review; the equipment sale does not answer every question about the people attending the site. [4]

What to put in a business-visitor file

Prepare a clear itinerary and an accurate employer letter, supported by invitations, agendas or contracts as appropriate. For after-sales work, include the sale and service terms, evidence of the equipment's origin, and a description of the employee's relevant knowledge. The documents should explain the actual activity. They should not merely repeat that the employee is “attending meetings” if the project plan requires installation or client deliverables.

Some other treaty business-visitor provisions may also be relevant, including the professional-services provision in § 214.2(b)(4)(i)(G). It has its own conditions and should not be reduced to a Canadian-payroll exception. Where the proposed activity goes beyond an ordinary meeting or negotiation, identify the exact legal basis being relied on and test the facts against it. [4]

3. TN: match the profession, duties and credentials

TN classification arises under INA § 214(e) and the USMCA. The detailed requirements and professional list are in 8 C.F.R. § 214.6. It is available to qualifying Canadian and Mexican citizens undertaking prearranged professional activities. It is not a general category for every skilled employee or every position requiring a university degree. [7, 8]

Three separate parts of the analysis

First, identify a profession on the list. Second, examine whether the actual U.S. activities fall within that profession. Third, establish that the employee holds the required qualifications. A strong answer to one does not cure a weakness in the others. For example, an engineering degree does not establish that a sales or general management assignment is engineering work. Conversely, an employer's engineering title does not establish that the employee has the required credentials.

The professional list contains different educational and alternative credential requirements. Where a bachelor's degree is required without an alternative, years of experience cannot simply replace it. Degrees awarded outside Canada, Mexico or the United States require the credential evaluation specified in § 214.6(d)(3)(ii). State licensing and, for some health professions, additional certification requirements also require separate attention. [7, 9, 20]

Common classification problems

Computer systems analyst. USCIS guidance distinguishes systems analysis from programming. Some programming may be part of an analyst's duties, but the category does not cover a position that is actually a programmer role. The evidence should explain the analysis of users' needs and the design or implementation of systems, where those are the genuine duties. Changing a developer's title does not change the underlying work. [9, B.7]

Management consultant. This is not a general route for managers. USCIS describes work addressing strategic and operational problems and improving an organization's performance. Its guidance distinguishes consulting arrangements from ordinary staffing: a consultant employed by the client may fill an irregular or non-routine temporary position, while a U.S. management-consulting firm may employ the professional in an otherwise permanent position. The contractual engagement and the work performed need to support the category. [9, B.6]

Engineer. Current USCIS guidance requires a degree in the related engineering field when relying on the degree route and addresses the credentials needed for computer-related engineering work. Employers should examine the employee's actual education and the proposed specialty, rather than treating all technical qualifications as equivalent. [9, B.11]

Canadian payroll and client assignments

A TN support letter may come from a U.S. employer or a foreign employer, and a Canadian business can in appropriate circumstances send a professional to provide prearranged services to a U.S. entity. The application should identify the U.S. entity, the services, duration and remuneration arrangements. A Canadian employment contract alone may not establish what the employee will do for the U.S. customer. [7, §§ 214.6(b), (d)(3), (h)(2); 20]

TN does not authorize establishing a U.S. business or practice in which the professional is, in substance, self-employed. The regulation expressly includes services to an entity of which the professional is the sole or controlling owner. Ownership and consulting arrangements therefore deserve close review. A contract label is not enough to resolve whether an arrangement amounts to prohibited self-employment. [7, § 214.6(b)]

The supporting record and the period of stay

The regulation requires documentation affirming the profession, professional activities, anticipated stay, qualifications and pay arrangements. Assemble the signed support letter with degrees, transcripts where useful, evaluations, licences and experience evidence relevant to the chosen profession. For a client project, the statement of work should be consistent with the letter. Explain the connection between the evidence and the requirements instead of submitting an unorganized collection of credentials. [7, § 214.6(d)(3)]

TN admission can be granted for up to three years, with extensions available in periods of up to three years. There is no specified overall maximum, but each application remains subject to eligibility and temporary-entry requirements. The regulation requires an assignment with a predictable end and an intention to depart when it finishes. A plan for indefinite U.S. residence requires separate consideration. [7, §§ 214.6(b), (e), (h)]

Canadian citizens may ordinarily apply for TN admission at an appropriate port of entry or preclearance location. Extensions may also be requested through USCIS where the regulatory conditions are met. The filing route should follow the employee's location, current status and travel plans; it does not relax the substantive test. [7, § 214.6(d), (h); 20]

4. L-1: establish the transfer, not just the job title

L-1 classification permits qualifying transfers between related businesses. L-1A concerns executives and managers; L-1B concerns specialized knowledge. The foundation is INA § 101(a)(15)(L), with definitions and evidence requirements in 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(l). A Canadian company that has a U.S. customer does not necessarily have the corporate relationship needed for L-1. [1, 10]

The business relationship and continuing operations

The entities must fit the regulatory definitions of parent, branch, subsidiary or affiliate. These definitions concern ownership and control, not simply cooperation or common branding. Evidence may include incorporation records, share registers, ownership agreements and a corporate chart tied to the underlying records. The organization must be doing business in the United States and at least one other country for the relevant period, subject to the rules for a new U.S. office. [10, § 214.2(l)(1)(ii)(G)-(L)]

“Doing business” requires regular, systematic and continuous provision of goods or services. Maintaining an address, registration or bank account is not, on its own, the operating activity required by the regulation. For an established operation, contracts, invoices, payroll and financial records can help explain what each entity actually does. [10, § 214.2(l)(1)(ii)(H)]

The employee's qualifying foreign employment

The ordinary individual-petition requirements include at least one continuous year of qualifying full-time employment abroad within the relevant preceding three-year period. The evidence must address both the length and the nature of that employment. Brief U.S. trips generally do not interrupt continuity but do not count towards the required year abroad. HR should reconcile the employment dates with travel records instead of relying solely on the anniversary of the employee's start date. [10, §§ 214.2(l)(1)(ii)(A), (3)(iii)-(iv)]

The foreign qualifying role must have been managerial, executive or involved specialized knowledge, although the U.S. work need not be identical. The dates and the applicable reference period deserve particular care where the employee has already spent time working in the United States. A new hire who has not accumulated the required foreign employment cannot satisfy that requirement merely because the U.S. role is senior. [10]

L-1A: who will perform the operational work?

The statutory definitions focus on what the employee will primarily do. A qualifying manager may manage other supervisory, professional or managerial employees, or manage an essential function at a sufficiently senior level. An executive directs management, establishes goals or policies and exercises broad discretion. A first-line supervisor does not qualify merely by supervising others, unless the supervised employees are professional. [1, § 101(a)(44); 10]

For a small business, the record should explain how the proposed manager will be relieved of performing most day-to-day service delivery. A staffing chart should identify real roles, reporting relationships and responsibilities. If a function-manager theory is used, identify the essential function, the employee's authority over it and the people who carry out its operational tasks. Headcount alone is not the statutory test, but an unexplained staffing gap can make the proposed duties difficult to substantiate.

L-1B: explain the knowledge and why the assignment needs it

The regulation recognizes special knowledge of the organization's products, services or other interests and their application in international markets, or advanced knowledge of its processes and procedures. Merely describing an employee as valuable, experienced or hard to replace does not explain those features. Useful evidence may include training records, project history, technical responsibilities and a comparison showing what the employee knows and how that knowledge will be used in the U.S. role. [10, § 214.2(l)(1)(ii)(D)]

Client-site assignments raise an additional statutory issue. Under INA § 214(c)(2)(F), an L-1B worker stationed primarily at an unaffiliated employer's worksite is ineligible if that employer will principally control and supervise the worker, or if the placement is essentially labour for hire rather than provision of a product or service requiring knowledge specific to the petitioner. The contracts and actual supervision arrangements matter, not just which business issues the payslip. [8]

Opening a new U.S. office

An organization that has been doing business in the United States for less than one year falls within the regulatory new-office definition. For a new-office L-1A case, the petition must address sufficient physical premises, the employee's qualifying managerial or executive employment abroad, and how the U.S. operation will support a qualifying managerial or executive role within one year of approval. The business plan should connect funding, anticipated activity and staffing to that proposed role. [10, §§ 214.2(l)(1)(ii)(F), (3)(v)]

New-office approval is limited initially to one year. The extension depends on evidence of what the business has actually accomplished, including its activity, staffing and the employee's duties. An ambitious plan is not a substitute for operating evidence at that stage. New-office L-1B petitions have their own requirements, including premises, a qualifying organization and financial ability to pay the employee and begin business. [10, §§ 214.2(l)(3)(vi), (7)(i)(A)(3), (14)(ii)]

Established-office approvals may initially cover up to three years. The ordinary overall limits are seven years for L-1A and five for L-1B, with specific counting rules and exceptions, including certain intermittent or commuting arrangements. Retain travel records and review the remaining time before promising a further assignment. L-1 also accommodates an intention to pursue permanent residence in a way that TN does not; any permanent-residence strategy still requires its own analysis. [10, §§ 214.2(l)(7), (12), (15)-(16)]

5. E-1 and E-2: the enterprise must qualify too

Canada is an E-1 treaty-trader and E-2 treaty-investor country. These classifications can be relevant to a Canadian-owned business with substantial qualifying trade or investment, including certain employees of that enterprise. They are not restricted to founders, but they do require more than a Canadian incorporation document and a U.S. customer. [11, 12]

E-1: substantial trade principally with the treaty country

E-1 examines an existing flow of international trade, which may include services as well as goods. The regulation places importance on numerous transactions over time; a single transaction does not establish substantial trade merely because it is valuable. More than 50 percent of the enterprise's international trade must be between the United States and the treaty country. That is a test of international trade, not a requirement that more than half of all revenue, including domestic revenue, come from U.S. customers. [12, § 214.2(e)(9)-(11)]

For a service business, assemble contracts, invoices, payments and a consistent transaction summary showing the counterparties and countries. Explain what is exchanged and how the totals were calculated. Projections may help describe future plans, but the legal inquiry includes the existing qualifying trade.

E-2: committed investment in a real operating enterprise

E-2 requires substantial capital invested, or actively being invested, in a bona fide U.S. enterprise, with the investor coming to develop and direct it. The capital must be at risk and committed to the business. There is no universal statutory dollar figure that guarantees approval: the regulation measures substantiality in relation to the cost and nature of the enterprise, the investor's commitment and the likelihood of developing the operation. [1, § 101(a)(15)(E)(ii); 12, § 214.2(e)(2), (12)-(16)]

The business must also be more than marginal under the regulatory test. Where future capacity is relied on, the projected capacity should generally be realizable within five years after normal business activity begins. The record should connect investment expenditures, the source and movement of funds, the operating plan and credible financial projections. Simply transferring money into a U.S. bank account does not, without more, explain how the investment meets these requirements. [12]

Employees: nationality and the role require separate proof

An E employee must share the qualifying employer's treaty nationality and perform executive or supervisory duties, or possess special qualifications essential to the enterprise's efficient operation. For a business entity, ownership generally must be traced to the ultimate owners; the employee rules include an at-least-50-percent qualifying ownership test and conditions concerning those owners' immigration status or eligibility. Canadian registration alone does not establish Canadian treaty nationality. [12, § 214.2(e)(3), (7), (17)-(18)]

This can matter when selecting among employees. A Canadian company may have a highly qualified Canadian permanent resident who is not a Canadian citizen. That person's ability to obtain an E classification depends on the applicable treaty nationality and enterprise structure, not simply on Canadian employment. Where an E route is suitable, plan the visa application as well as admission; the ordinary Canadian visa exemption does not remove the E-visa requirement. [2, 12]

6. When another classification needs consideration

TN, L-1 and E classifications will not fit every assignment. H-1B may warrant review for qualifying specialty-occupation employment; O-1 may be relevant to an individual with the required record of extraordinary ability. Each has its own employer, evidence and procedural requirements. A failure to qualify under one route is a reason to reassess the assignment, not to describe the same work as an ordinary business visit. [1; 13, § 214.2(h), (o)]

H-1B planning needs particular attention to the cap and selection rules, the labour condition application, required wages and current entry-related requirements. The employer's budget should be based on the actual proposed filing, rather than a generic list of visa fees. This guide concentrates on the four routes above and does not provide a complete H-1B or O-1 eligibility analysis. [13, 21]

7. Build an evidence file that answers the legal questions

The best preparation begins with the commercial records already governing the work. Obtain the statement of work, employment agreement and corporate records before drafting an immigration support letter. If those records describe different duties, entities or dates, resolve the underlying facts. A polished letter cannot reliably compensate for a contradictory project contract.

These are practical evidence examples derived from the requirements discussed above, not an exhaustive filing checklist. Authorities: 8 C.F.R. §§ 214.2(b)(4), (e), (l)(3), and 214.6(d)(3). [4, 7, 10, 12]

Separate corporate and assignment information from sensitive personal information. The employee should have an appropriate confidential channel to disclose past immigration refusals, overstays, criminal matters or other issues requiring an admissibility assessment. HR needs the resulting travel or scheduling advice; it does not necessarily need unrestricted access to every personal record.

Assign responsibility for unresolved questions. A project manager may know who directs the daily work, finance may hold the investment records, and the employee may need to obtain an old transcript. A file moves more efficiently when each missing fact has an owner and a date for resolution.

8. Plan the application, admission and start date together

The procedure depends on both classification and citizenship. Canadian TN applicants ordinarily have a direct admission route. Certain Canadian L-1 filings can be presented with an admission application at specified U.S.-Canada land-border ports or preclearance locations under § 214.2(l)(17); advance USCIS filing is also possible. E cases ordinarily involve the appropriate visa before admission. These procedural differences can affect scheduling, but none guarantees a same-day result. [2, 7, 10]

Allow time for evidence collection, legal review, any petition decision, a visa appointment where required and possible requests for additional information. Premium processing, where available, concerns the eligible USCIS adjudication; it should not be confused with guaranteed approval, a guaranteed consular appointment or permission to start work. Check the current forms, fees, filing instructions and processing options when the route is selected. [22]

Before travel, the employee should understand the work described in the application and carry the appropriate documents. Accurate explanations are more useful than memorized labels. If the assignment has changed since the evidence was prepared, review the change before relying on the previous package.

Check the admission record immediately

Where an I-94 is issued, retrieve it and check the employee's name, passport details, classification and admitted-until date. The visa expiration date does not establish the period the employee may remain in the United States. Compare the admission record with the approval and intended work; an unexpected classification or shortened stay should be investigated promptly through the appropriate correction or advice channel. [15]

For example, an employee may possess a visa valid beyond the date shown on the I-94. The longer visa validity does not extend that admission. Similarly, a petition approval should not be treated as a substitute for confirming that the employee was admitted in the classification authorizing the proposed assignment. Put the actual status deadline in the employer's records, along with a date for extension planning.

Include the family in relocation planning

A spouse or child may need a separate visa, admission or status application depending on nationality and circumstances. TN dependants in TD status do not receive employment authorization merely from TD status. In contrast, qualifying E and L spouses are employment-authorized incident to valid spousal status under USCIS policy; the appropriate I-94 spouse notation, such as E-2S or L-2S, is important evidence. Dependent children do not obtain that spousal work authorization. A family's ability to relocate should be assessed before commitments are made. [7, § 214.6(j); 8, §§ 214(c)(2)(E), (e)(2); 19]

9. Manage the assignment after approval

Approval should lead to a short, usable internal record: authorized employer or entity, duties, work locations, period of stay and any particular restrictions. Employment must remain within the authorization granted. Give the relevant manager a clear process for raising changes before they take effect. The immigration file should remain connected to the operational project, rather than becoming an archive that no one checks. [18]

A new employer or changed role

For TN, work for a different or additional U.S. employer is not authorized merely because a new Form I-129 has been filed. Section 214.6(i) requires approval, with a separate readmission procedure also available where appropriate. The regulation distinguishes a move to another location of the same employer to perform the same services from a transfer to a separately incorporated subsidiary or affiliate. “It is all the same group” is therefore not a sufficient answer. [7]

L-1 material changes may require an amended petition under § 214.2(l)(7)(i)(C). E status also has rules for substantive changes, including certain mergers, acquisitions and changes in the employing entity. Review promotions, altered reporting relationships, new client placements and corporate transactions before implementation. Not every address or administrative change requires a new filing, but the employer should know why the existing approval still covers the work. [10, 12]

Employment verification is a separate obligation

Where Form I-9 requirements apply, approval of an immigration petition does not replace them. The employee completes the employee section at the time of hire, and the employer generally completes document review and its section within three business days. Employment lasting fewer than three business days has an earlier completion requirement. Employees may choose from the acceptable document combinations; employers should not demand a particular document merely because the employee is foreign. [16, § 274a.2(b)(1)]

Assess who is the employer and what verification obligations apply in a cross-border service or transfer arrangement. Keep a system for reverification when required. For retained Forms I-9, the ordinary retention period is three years after hire or one year after employment ends, whichever is later. This recordkeeping obligation is distinct from retaining the evidence supporting TN, L-1 or E eligibility. [16, § 274a.2(b)(2)]

Extensions and the end of employment

Set internal review dates well before the status expires. An extension filing is not a universal permission to continue working: continuation depends on the classification, employer, timeliness and applicable rules. The employee's own status and any family applications also need attention. A pending petition should never be the only fact HR relies on to authorize a start date or continued work.

After qualifying employment ends, certain workers, including TN, L-1 and E workers, may have a discretionary grace period of up to 60 consecutive days or until the authorized validity period ends, whichever is shorter, once during each authorized validity period. DHS can shorten or eliminate it. The grace period itself does not authorize employment. Review options promptly instead of assuming that every employee automatically has another 60 days to work or remain. [17, § 214.1(l)(2)-(3)]

Immigration permission also does not determine tax residence, payroll withholding, employment-law obligations or professional licensing. Assign those questions to the appropriate advisers as part of the same project timetable.

10. Three assignments worked through

These examples show how to organize the analysis. They do not predict an application outcome.

A. A software project changes after the sales meeting

Facts. A Toronto software company sends a Canadian employee to discuss a proposed implementation with a U.S. customer. The customer then asks the employee to remain for three weeks to configure its systems and deliver part of the project.

Analysis. The original negotiation and the later delivery work require separate consideration. The employer should not assume that visitor admission for the meeting covers the extension. A TN analysis would examine the real profession, duties and credentials; a programmer role cannot simply be described as computer systems analysis. If after-sales service is considered, the sale, foreign manufacture and contractual-service conditions must actually be met. Neither route follows automatically from the word “software.” [3, 4, 7, 9]

Employer's next step. Obtain the revised scope, identify the tasks and contractual obligations, and assess authorization before the employee performs the additional work. If no suitable route is available for the proposed dates, revise delivery arrangements rather than the description supplied to immigration officials.

B. A Vancouver company opens its first U.S. operation

Facts. A Canadian business establishes a U.S. subsidiary and proposes to transfer a long-serving operations director. The director will initially negotiate contracts, recruit staff and oversee the launch.

Analysis. An L-1A new-office case requires proof of the qualifying corporate relationship and foreign employment, as well as the premises and a credible plan showing that the U.S. operation will support a managerial or executive role within one year. The director's title and tenure do not answer who will perform the routine operational work as the business develops. [1, 10]

Employer's next step. Connect the business plan to available funding, a realistic hiring schedule and the director's proposed duties. From the outset, retain the invoices, payroll records and activity evidence that will be needed to explain progress at the extension stage.

C. A Montreal equipment supplier sends a service team

Facts. A supplier sells equipment manufactured in Canada to a U.S. customer. Its warranty includes commissioning and training. The customer also asks the supplier's team to undertake construction work needed to prepare the premises.

Analysis. Qualifying commissioning or training may warrant consideration under the USMCA after-sales provision, provided the other conditions are satisfied. The construction tasks require separate treatment because the visitor regulation excludes actually performing building or construction work. Each employee's activities and knowledge should be assessed; a qualifying task for one specialist does not establish eligibility for the entire team. [4]

Employer's next step. Divide the site plan into specific tasks, identify who will perform each one and document the contractual basis for the service work. Arrange separately for tasks that the proposed admission would not authorize.

11. An assignment worksheet for HR

Use the following questions to prepare an initial review. The objective is to gather facts, identify uncertainty and give the business a realistic basis for approving travel.

1. Employee. What citizenships does the employee hold? What qualifications and relevant employment history are available to document? Is a confidential personal admissibility review needed?
2. Business purpose. What does the U.S. customer or related company expect the employee to accomplish? Which activities are meetings or negotiations, and which produce deliverables?
3. Entities and control. Which legal entity employs the person? Who receives the services, pays for them and supervises the work? If related companies are involved, what proves their ownership and control?
4. Location and timing. Where will each activity occur? What are the proposed dates, including repeat visits? Which commitments depend on immigration approval or admission?
5. Legal route. Which classification or specific visitor provision is proposed? What fact supports each element? What is missing or inconsistent?
6. Application and travel. Who prepares and signs the evidence? Is a petition or visa needed? What documents will the employee carry, and who checks the I-94 after arrival?
7. During the assignment. Who monitors deadlines, changed duties, new customers and corporate changes? What is the procedure if the assignment ends early?
8. Related planning. Are family status, professional licensing, payroll, tax and employment obligations being addressed by the appropriate advisers?

For the internal decision record, write a short conclusion identifying the proposed route, the supporting facts, unresolved issues and the earliest defensible start date. Record who has responsibility for each remaining step. Revisit that conclusion if the commercial arrangement changes.

Assistance with a proposed assignment

Stafford Immigration Group advises businesses on U.S. employment immigration, company transfers and treaty trade and investment matters. Our firm can review the proposed work, assess the available classifications and assist with the evidence, application and ongoing immigration requirements. Please request an assessment with a description of the assignment and its intended timing.

References and legal authorities

Research checked October 3, 2026. INA citations identify provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act; their corresponding U.S. Code sections are provided below. The linked annual U.S. Code compilation is the 2024 edition; the relevant current implementing regulations and listed agency materials were also checked. The eCFR is an authoritative but unofficial compilation. Agency guidance describes administrative interpretation and procedure; it is not interchangeable with statutory or regulatory text. The historical decisions below are used for the specific business-visitor principles discussed, with current treaty provisions addressed separately.

1. INA § 101(a)(15)(B), (E), (L), and § 101(a)(44); 8 U.S.C. § 1101. Business visitors; treaty classifications; intracompany transferees; managerial and executive definitions.
2. U.S. Department of State, Citizens of Canada and Bermuda. Canadian visa exemptions and exceptions, including E-1 and E-2.
3. 22 C.F.R. § 41.31(a)-(b). Temporary visitors and the exclusion of local employment or labour for hire. See also Department of State, B-1 allowable uses.
4. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(b)(4)-(5). USMCA business visitors; after-sales services at (b)(4)(i)(F); professional services at (G); construction restriction at (b)(5).
5. Matter of Hira, 11 I&N Dec. 824 (BIA 1965, 1966; A.G. 1966), especially 826-830. Published decision concerning international commercial activity and business-visitor classification.
6. Matter of Neill, 15 I&N Dec. 331 (BIA 1975), especially 332-334. Professional engineering services and the ordinary business-visitor category.
7. 8 C.F.R. § 214.6(b)-(e), (h)-(j). TN definitions, professional list, evidence, admission, extensions, employer changes and dependants.
8. INA § 214(c)(2)(E)-(F), (e); 8 U.S.C. § 1184. L spouses; L-1B work at unaffiliated worksites; USMCA professionals; E spouses.
9. USCIS Policy Manual, Vol. 2, Part P, Chapter 6, especially B.6, B.7 and B.11. Management consultants, computer systems analysts and engineers. Live page checked in browser; displayed current as of October 2, 2026.
10. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(l), especially (1), (3), (7), (12), and (14)-(17). L-1 definitions, evidence, new offices, amendments, duration, extensions, immigrant intent and Canadian filing procedures.
11. U.S. Department of State, Treaty Countries, Canada entries. Canada qualifies for E-1 and E-2 treaty purposes.
12. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(e)(1)-(18). Treaty trade and investment, employees, nationality, qualifying activity and substantive changes.
13. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h) and (o). H classifications, including H-1B, and O classifications. These routes require additional case-specific analysis beyond this guide.
14. Presidential proclamation, Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers, September 18, 2026, §§ 1-3; Federal Register publication September 23, 2026, document 2026-19554. Dated H-1B entry/payment issue; implementation and litigation must be checked for a proposed filing.
15. U.S. Department of State, What the Visa Expiration Date Means. Distinction between visa validity, admission and the period of authorized stay.
16. 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)-(2). Employment verification, document choice, completion periods, reverification and retention.
17. 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2)-(3). Discretionary grace period following cessation of qualifying employment.
18. 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(e). Employment restrictions and maintenance of nonimmigrant status.
19. USCIS, Employment Authorization for E and L Nonimmigrant Spouses, March 18, 2022; see also Social Security Administration, POMS RM 10211.420, April 27, 2026. Spousal employment authorization and I-94 spouse codes; TD distinguished from E/L spousal status.
20. U.S. Department of State, Visas for Canadian and Mexican USMCA Professional Workers. Eligibility, credentials, Canadian admission procedure, visa exceptions and licensing considerations.
21. 20 C.F.R. § 655.731. H-1B labour condition application wage requirement.
22. 8 C.F.R. § 106.4. Premium processing service and adjudicative action; a request for evidence or other action may occur instead of approval.