Identify the statutory category's central factual test before relying on an appealing feature of the proposal.
E2 planning question: requirements
E-2 turns on treaty nationality, a substantial commercial investment, a real enterprise, non-marginality, and the investor's ability to develop and direct it. It is not enough to hold cash, form a company, or announce a purchase. Hypothetical example: a Canadian national signs a conditional agreement to acquire a small service company.
The review asks whether funds are lawfully sourced and meaningfully committed, whether the agreement exposes the investor to commercial loss, whether the business is viable beyond household support, and whether the buyer will direct operations. A passive lender, a speculative property holder, or an unspent account balance may tell a different story. The facts should be tested against the actual venture rather than an online rule of thumb.
Before acting, compare the written facts with the official source and identify what remains uncertain. Ask whether a changed title, delayed payment, revised ownership arrangement, or different work plan would alter the conclusion. That exercise is valuable because eligibility is based on the arrangement that will actually exist, not the version that seemed most attractive during early planning.
If a material fact is still contingent, label it as contingent and retain the supporting document that will show when it becomes final. The review should also distinguish immigration criteria from commercial prudence. A proposal may be commercially sensible yet not fit this category, or it may meet a category test while still requiring separate tax, licensing, and contract advice.