EB-1C: THE GREEN CARD FOR EXECUTIVES AND MANAGERS OF COMPANIES WITH U.S. OPERATIONS

Transferring an executive to the U.S. on a temporary visa works in the short term. In the medium term, it creates a structural problem: annual renewals that depend on government approval, uncertainty for the executive and the operation, and the need to restart the process every cycle.

The EB-1C exists to solve this permanently. It is the Green Card category created specifically for companies that already operate in both countries and need key leadership in the U.S. on a definitive basis, with permanent residence, no expiration date, and none of the barriers that make other routes slower and less predictable.

In practice, the EB-1C eliminates the PERM labor certification, a process that can take 12 to 18 months in the Department of Labor certification phase alone, subject to audits and with uncertain outcomes. It also eliminates dependency on an outside employer: the company that already employs the executive is the petitioner.

For companies operating globally that need predictability in executive talent management, the EB-1C is the most direct instrument the U.S. immigration system offers.

Most immigration firms deliver the approved EB-1C and consider the work done. The problem is that visa approval opens a series of decisions that should have been made earlier, and when ignored, they create costs, risks, and rework for both the company and the executive.

HAYMAN-WOODWARD works differently. With over 30 years of experience in international corporate mobility and a presence in 9 countries, we integrate immigration, corporate structure, and tax planning into a single coordinated process from the start. Not because it is more elegant, but because the three dimensions affect each other, and decisions made in isolation frequently contradict one another.

The firm was founded by Leonardo Freitas, a former agent and consultant for the U.S. government with decades of direct experience in immigration proceedings. Knowing the process from the other side changes the way we build every petition.

What HR teams rarely get help resolving

A CHRO or Global Mobility Manager leading an executive transfer to the U.S. is managing at least four layers of complexity simultaneously: the immigration process itself, the executive’s compensation structure in both countries, the tax obligations that arise with the change of residence, and the corporate documentation that must align with what USCIS will scrutinize.

When these layers are managed by separate vendors without central coordination, the most common result is documentary inconsistency, unexpected tax exposure for the executive, and immigration delays caused by gaps that could have been anticipated.

Our team acts as the single point of coordination, meaning HR has one interlocutor for the entire process, not four vendors with independent agendas.

The right corporate structure from the start

The relationship between the U.S. company and the foreign entity must be qualified for the EB-1C. And the way that relationship is structured has implications well beyond immigration: it affects the level of control the parent company retains over the U.S. operation, the tax exposure of the U.S. entity, and asset protection across both jurisdictions.

Our team evaluates the existing or proposed corporate structure with two simultaneous objectives: ensuring the corporate relationship qualifies for the EB-1C, and ensuring the structure makes operational and fiscal sense for the long term. When the current structure does not qualify or is not the most efficient, we guide reorganization before filing, not after receiving an RFE.

What changes fiscally for the executive, and why it must be planned before approval

An executive who obtains permanent residence in the U.S. becomes a worldwide U.S. taxpayer. All global income, salaries, dividends, equity interests, rental income, capital gains, becomes reportable to the IRS regardless of where it was generated.

This change must be planned before Green Card approval, not after. Compensation structures that made sense for a non-resident may become inefficient or create unexpected tax exposure after the status change. Our tax planning division works alongside the immigration team to map the executive’s current tax position, model post-approval scenarios, and identify the most efficient compensation and holding structures for the new reality, before approval creates obligations that were not anticipated. The most appropriate structure depends on each executive’s specific profile and is determined during the individual assessment.

The executive’s U.S. compensation: what the company needs to define

The company also needs to structure how it will compensate the executive in the U.S. operation, and that decision has corporate, labor, and tax implications in both countries. More importantly, it must be consistent with what was declared to USCIS in the EB-1C petition. Contradictions between the role description in the petition and the actual compensation structure are a vulnerability in audits and RFEs.

Our team coordinates this definition with the legal and tax teams, ensuring consistency between what was stated to USCIS, what appears in the corporate documents, and what the company actually practices.

Immigration, corporate structure, and tax planning are not three processes that happen in sequence. They are three dimensions of a single strategic decision. In practice, what we see in the cases we handle is that companies that arrive with all three layers coordinated from the start have stronger petitions, fewer RFEs, and executives who arrive in the U.S. without fiscal surprises. HAYMAN-WOODWARD is the partner that coordinates all three.

The EB-1C, Multinational Executive or Manager, is a first-preference employment-based Green Card category in the U.S. immigration system. USCIS evaluates simultaneously the qualification of the executive or manager and the structure of the organization transferring them. Understanding that duality is what separates an approved petition from one that receives an RFE.

Eligibility depends on three vectors that must be demonstrated together.

The EB-1C is available for two categories of function. USCIS defines them technically, not according to the common corporate usage of these words.

Executive capacity

Direction of the management of the organization or a major component of it, establishment of goals and policies, exercise of broad discretionary authority, and supervision received only from higher-level executives or the board of directors. The person who sets direction, not the person who executes it.

Managerial capacity: two recognized types

The first is people management: supervision and control of the work of other qualified professionals, with real authority to hire, evaluate, and direct. The second is function management: direction of an essential function of the organization, even without direct supervision of a large team, such as a CFO who controls the entire financial structure of the company.

The legal strategy must identify which argument is strongest for the executive’s specific profile and sustain it consistently from the beginning to the end of the petition.

The EB-1C requires the U.S. company to be genuinely operating at the time of filing. USCIS evaluates: a physical office or regular workspace, employees or contractors, active revenue or contracts, and real fiscal and operational presence. A registered company with no demonstrable activity does not support the petition.

Recently established U.S. operations: the L-1A to EB-1C path

For companies whose U.S. operation is less than one year old, the correct path is not to file the EB-1C directly, it is the L-1A first.

The L-1A is approved for an initial one-year period for new offices and up to three years for established offices, extendable in two-year increments, with a maximum total stay of seven years. It allows the executive to build out the U.S. operation while the company reaches the substance required for the EB-1C. When planned from the start, the L-1A track record creates the ideal documentary foundation for the EB-1C petition.

An important point that is rarely mentioned: unlike the H-1B, an approved I-140 does not extend L-1A status beyond the seven-year maximum. For this reason, planning the transition from L-1A to EB-1C must begin two to three years before the L-1A limit is reached.

In practice, executives who arrive at HAYMAN-WOODWARD with an L-1A near the seven-year limit and no EB-1C in progress lose the concurrent filing window, the simultaneous filing of the I-140 and I-485 that significantly shortens the process. Transition planning must begin two to three years in advance.

HAYMAN-WOODWARD plans both in sequence from the start, L-1A in the expansion phase, EB-1C as the long-term objective. One strategy, not isolated transactions.

If your company has a genuine U.S. operation and an executive with a proven organizational track record, there is an EB-1C argument to be assessed. What our team does is map the structure, identify the key issues, and build the petition with the precision USCIS requires.

In USCIS data from the third quarter of 2025, the EB-1C recorded fewer than 2.4% denials among adjudicated petitions, the lowest rate across all EB-1 categories. But that figure aggregates all petitions regardless of preparation quality. Petitions with incomplete corporate documentation, vague role descriptions, or no prior tax analysis face RFE rates above 40% and post-RFE denial rates of 25% to 30%.

The difference is not in the executive’s credentials. It is in the legal strategy behind the documentation.

Insufficient corporate relationship documentation

USCIS requires clear evidence of the qualified corporate relationship. Incomplete corporate documents, unclear holding structures, or ownership interests that do not meet regulatory definitions are the most frequent cause of RFEs. The solution begins before filing: structure audit, gap identification, and documentary reorganization where necessary.

Role description that does not support executive or managerial capacity

A petition that describes the beneficiary as responsible for overall operations without detailing the actual scope of authority and autonomous decisions does not meet the USCIS standard. Executive titles without functional substance are increasingly questioned. The role description must be precise, verifiable, and built with the language of 8 CFR § 204.5(j)(2).

U.S. operation with insufficient substance

A registered subsidiary without real activity does not support the argument that the executive is leading a genuine operation. For companies in an early stage, the correct path is the L-1A while the operation is established, not filing the EB-1C prematurely.

Qualifying one-year period poorly documented

The one-year period in an executive or managerial capacity abroad must be documented precisely. Gaps, inconsistencies, or generic documentation generate RFEs. When the prior role was not clearly executive or managerial throughout, this must be addressed in the petition strategy before filing.

RFEs responded without legal strategy

An RFE is not a denial, but a poorly structured response frequently results in one. Our team has specific experience with EB-1C RFEs, with a legal approach that directly addresses the point raised by the officer with the correct supplemental documentation.

1. Eligibility assessment

   We analyze the corporate structure, the executive’s track record, the nature of the U.S. role, and the tax position of both parties. We identify the petition’s strongest points, the gaps to resolve, and whether the EB-1C is the right route now or whether the L-1A is the recommended prior step.

2. Corporate and tax structuring

   Before any filing, we review, and when necessary guide the reorganization of, the structure between the two entities and the executive’s compensation model. This step ensures that the corporate documentation supports the immigration argument and that approval does not create fiscal surprises.

3. Petition construction

   Our legal team drafts the I-140 with precise argumentation on each EB-1C requirement. This is not form completion. It is the construction of a legal argument that anticipates USCIS scrutiny points and addresses them proactively.

4. Filing and case management

   We file the petition and monitor the process in real time. With premium processing, USCIS guarantees a decision or action on the I-140 within 45 business days. Any USCIS communication, including RFEs, is managed by our team with a structured response.

5. Adjustment of status or consular processing

   After I-140 approval, we coordinate the next step. For most nationalities in June 2026, EB-1 is current on the Visa Bulletin, allowing concurrent filing, the simultaneous submission of the I-140 and I-485. The complete process, from filing to Green Card, typically ranges from 12 to 24 months.

EB-1C vs PERM / EB-2 or EB-3
The PERM route requires labor certification by the Department of Labor, a process that can take 12 to 18 months in the certification phase alone, subject to audits. For nationals of some countries, priority date backlogs can span decades. The EB-1C eliminates PERM entirely and, for most nationalities, operates without a meaningful wait.

EB-1C vs EB-5
The EB-5 requires a minimum investment of $800,000 to $1,050,000 in an approved U.S. project, with documented job creation. The EB-1C has no minimum investment requirement. Eligibility is based on function and corporate structure, not capital deployed.

EB-1C vs EB-1A
The EB-1A is based on the individual’s personal recognition in their field, independent of any company. The EB-1C is based on the corporate relationship and the role. For executives whose profile is defined by the position they hold within the organization, the EB-1C is the strongest argument. In some cases, both can be filed in parallel when the profile supports both routes with a good probability of approval.