When an organization undergoes major corporate change, such as a merger or acquisition, employees with US visas may face immigration consequences as their sponsorships for employment are often tied to the specific employer. In many cases, the US government must be notified to reflect the employee’s new company ownership and structure.
The impact of an M&A transaction will depend on multiple factors, including the nature of the corporate transaction and the type of visa or immigration status the foreign worker holds. Before the deal closes and the transaction takes effect, employers must address how changes in corporate name, ownership, structure, and location may affect the workforce’s employment authorization, visa and green card eligibility, and pending immigration applications. Failure to address pre-close requirements may result in the employer and in-scope employees falling out of compliance.1
When a corporate transaction results in the acquisition of new employees, the new corporate entity must choose either to consider these employees as “new” or “continuing.” This applies to all employees, irrespective of citizenship or visa status. New employees require a new Form I-9 (Employment Eligibility Verification) from the new corporate entity, whereas continuing employees will require the new corporate entity to review and assume responsibility for any corrections and errors in existing Form I-9 records.
Before assuming the risk of another entity’s Form I-9 records, employers should conduct a full review or a sample audit of the Form I-9s in advance of the acquisition to make a more informed choice. When substantive and technical issues are identified, which may include missing Form I-9s or errors, it may be preferable to treat the acquired employees as new hires and complete new Form I-9s. This decision requires consideration of the associated risks of treating the employees as “new” or “continuing,” and any Form I-9 process requires significant pre-planning when I-9 activities coincide with transaction closing dates.
The three most critical questions in a corporate transaction with regard to the immigration consequences for employment-based sponsored employees are:
Below, we explore the impact these answers have on two commonly utilized work visa categories—the H-1B and the L-1—as well as those employees in the US green card process.
Employer obligations for H-1B specialty occupation workers before the transaction has closed include the following:
One outcome exists after the M&A Transaction Closes:
If an H-1B worker’s job is eliminated as part of a layoff during or after the transaction closes, the employee may have a grace period up to 60 days to find a new sponsoring employer or to leave the United States.
L-1 visa holders, who are intracompany transferees, may also be impacted by corporate changes. For an L-1 visa to remain valid, there typically must be a qualifying relationship between the US employer and the foreign entity; this could be a parent, subsidiary, branch, or affiliate. In the event of a merger or acquisition, this relationship could be disrupted if the new organization does not maintain a qualifying connection with the foreign entity. For instance, if a foreign company’s US subsidiary is acquired by a company that has no foreign operations, the L-1 worker may no longer be eligible for the visa.
In some instances, M&A transactions may require an amended petition to notify USCIS of the corporate entity change. As with the H-1B classification, if there are significant changes to the L-1 employee’s role or responsibilities, an amended petition may be required.
L-1 employees who entered on blanket petitions may not need an amended petition if the succeeding corporate entity updates its blanket petition to include the merged or acquired entities. If the M&A transaction affects only the US entity, and not the entity abroad, the qualifying corporate relationship may be lost for L-1 purposes.
L-1 workers who are affected by a layoff during the corporate transition may be eligible for a 60-day grace period to remain in the United States if their employment is terminated to apply for a change of status or depart the United States.
If the new entity is not a successor-in-interest of the prior employer, then employees with employment-based pending green card applications may need to begin the process anew. However, an exception exists for those whose adjustment of status applications have been pending for 180 days or more. In such cases, the employee can transfer (or “port”) to another employer, regardless of its successor-in-interest status. For job “portability,” the employer and green card applicant must inform USCIS of the changes and provide appropriate documentation as evidence.
To successfully execute an M&A transaction that involves the transfer or acquisition of employees, prevent the loss of foreign national talent, and maintain business continuity, employers should incorporate the following considerations into the transaction plan:
With sound planning during the diligence phase and prior to closing, immigration matters need not present a risk in the success of a corporate transaction. Careful planning can minimize disruptions for the entities involved and the impacted workforce during critical transitions.
1 While there are other types of corporate transactions (e.g., spinoffs or demergers) that carry immigration consequences, this article focuses on the impact when there is a combination of entities through an M&A.

In this edition, we examine Singapore’s forthcoming workplace fairness legislation and the implications for employers in a new era for equality. We also consider the unique HR challenges and opportunities presented by private equity investments in Germany.
We review important developments surrounding health and welfare plans in the United States, identifying key areas to monitor and action, and our Spotlight Q&A features our UK Pensions General Code Compliance Tracker, recently recognized by the Financial Times for “Innovation in Regulatory Solutions.”
We also examine the immigration challenges arising from mergers and acquisitions in the United States and consider how organizations can mitigate these challenges and minimize disruption to the business and impacted workforce.
Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising associated legal practices that are separate entities, including Mayer Brown LLP (Illinois, USA), Mayer Brown International LLP (England & Wales), Mayer Brown Hong Kong LLP (a Hong Kong limited liability partnership) and Tauil & Chequer Advogados (a Brazilian law partnership) (collectively, the “Mayer Brown Practices”). The Mayer Brown Practices are established in various jurisdictions and may be a legal person or a partnership. PK Wong LLC (“PKW”) is the constituent Singapore law practice of our licensed joint law venture in Singapore, Mayer Brown PK Wong Pte. Ltd. More information about the individual Mayer Brown Practices and PKW can be found in the Legal Notices section of our website.
“Mayer Brown” and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of Mayer Brown.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.