Master Plan — Consolidated

Plan C · Boris (Slovak/Oman) · Wendi (US citizen / Canadian PR) · William · Vladimir

Version 5.2 — 22 August 2026. Supersedes Versions 1–5.1. §14C is the capital-for-A/B menu; §14D is the gray-area map and the concealment lines that are not a plan. Sibling of Plan A (Senec) and Plan B (Canada v6, 10 Aug 2026). Planning analysis only — not legal or tax advice. Figures: [S] sourced, [Q] must be quoted locally, [E] estimate. Structuring tags: LAWFUL PLANNING / AGGRESSIVE BUT ARGUABLE / unavailable — concealment is not a plan.

Objective: Boris lives permanently in the United States with Wendi and William. William keeps a real relationship with Clayton. Future children are born in the US. Boris keeps Slovak/EU citizenship and either keeps the company on a clean US tax grid or sells it before he becomes a US person.

How to read this document. Two cheap questions, then wait: is the relationship still real at 12 months of documented visits (not cohabitation — that gate was impossible, see §3D), and what does Clayton say, through counsel, about a packaged Buffalo driving schedule. Stacked clocks put a CR-1 landing in 2029–2030, when William is 10–11. Do not spend money on I-130, 8832, or a sale until Stage 0 in §15 is done. Gray-area characterization (whose house, whose days) is §14D. Routes that only work by concealing facts from USCIS, CBP, IRS, CRA, or a family court are unavailable as a plan — named there so they are not used by accident.

Working numbers as of 22 Aug 2026 (Boris): company ~US$2M/year paid out to him (treat as net unless he corrects that it is revenue); Oman entity form still unknown; Clayton likely yes to a real Buffalo driving schedule (prediction, not consent); parenting-time calendar not yet written down. Separation date still a fill-in — stacked clocks in §4C assume ~spring 2026. See §14B.

The goal, stated plainly: Boris lives in the United States with Wendi and William for good. William visits Clayton. Buffalo is the destination that makes Clayton’s consent and a court order possible — a weekend by car, not an unaccompanied flight. The under-8 Air Canada rule binds visits until ~2027. It does not decide the 2029–2030 home. From 8 through 11, UM is non-stop only, $100–$118. [S11]

0. Verdict in one page

The family does not control the gate that decides whether Plan C exists. William moves to the United States only if Clayton consents or an Ontario court authorises the relocation. Reported Canadian relocation applications succeeded in 51% of 738 cases from 2001 to 2010 (Ontario 107/193 = 55%). The decisive variable is Clayton’s parenting-time share, not the destination. Joint physical custody (≥40% with the left-behind parent) was allowed in only 30% of those cases; sole custody in 64%. A move “to reside with a new partner” was the weakest of the three common reasons: 48% (103/216), versus 52% for a job and 53% for family support. [S36] Those figures pre-date the 2021 Divorce Act amendments and Barendregt v. Grebliunas, 2022 SCC 22. They are the best published baseline, not a current guarantee. §3B is the centre of this plan.

If that gate opens, the only durable lawful immigration path is a bona fide marriage to a US citizen and a CR-1/IR-1 spouse visa. K-1 is worse for a sole founder (no work until EAD). Routes that only work by concealing facts from USCIS, CBP, or the IRS are unavailable and are not discussed. E-2 is temporary; both Slovak and Omani nationality can support an E-2 (Oman treaty in force 11 June 1960). [S31]

If that gate opens, Buffalo–Niagara is still the home this plan argues for — because a driving schedule is what Clayton can live with and what a court can call reasonable under s. 16.92, not because William will still be under 8 when they move. Stacked clocks (§4C) put the CR-1 landing in 2029–2030, William aged 10–11. Florida is a live later option, and a live first home only if Clayton’s written yes is to funded non-stop UM rather than to drives. Do not enrol William in a NY school, or spend substantial parenting time in Buffalo, before the relocation is authorised. Hague: Canada and the US are both parties; a move without consent or an order is a wrongful removal and the Ontario case dies after the return. [S45]

Plan B’s “US tax is always worse than Canada” is not a uniform result — if the Oman entity can be checked-the-box. Oman is not on the Treas. Reg. §301.7701-2(b)(8) per se list, so eligibility is still [Q] from limited-liability constitutive documents, not a coin-flip. [S42] Do not work an un-elected Oman corporation from US soil.

The 19–23% headline is the $150k–$500k band, not this file’s working number. At ~$2M paid out to Boris, QBI is gone and the child tax credit is phased out. A Florida/Texas Schedule C is on the order of ~$0.73M / ~36.5% federal+SE [E]; Buffalo adds New York state (~$0.12–0.14M, no NYC tax) for roughly 42–44% all-in. That still beats Ontario (~52–53%). It does not beat remaining Oman-resident (~$0 until the 2028 5% PIT). Vs Oman, each year of US residence costs on the order of $0.73M (FL) to $0.85M (Buffalo). That is why Track 2 in §14B exists. §11’s old line that “the tax objection does not survive” was true against Ontario at $300k. It is false against Muscat at $2M.

They met around March 2026. The relationship-at-12-months question (40–70%) sits in front of every filing. That is 12 months of documented visits, not cohabitation. Nothing irreversible this winter.

1. The people and the fixed facts

Relationship: met ~March 2026, after Wendi landed as a PR — no undeclared-family issue. Boris flies VIE→YYZ on 5 September 2026 (AC887). Everything irreversible sits behind proof the relationship lasts.

Company: Oman free zone, 100% Boris, no employees, 100% of profit distributed every year. Revenue = AdMob + Meta Audience Network + IAP. Backend on Cloudflare / AWS / GCP. Working number 22 Aug 2026: ~US$2M/year paid out to him — treat as net unless he corrects that it is revenue. A one-person ad/IAP shop often has very high margins, so “paid out” is closer to net than a services-business revenue figure, but say so if cloud/ad-share costs are material. Entity form (LLC vs SAOC vs other) still unknown. US–Oman: no income-tax treaty, no totalization agreement. [S14] Oman 5% PIT from 1 January 2028 above OMR 42,000 (RD 56/2025). [S15]

2. Corrections log

Errors in Plan A/B (and in the Plan C brief) that must not be reintroduced.

3. The three hard constraints

3.1 Clayton’s consent or an Ontario order — the master gate. See §3B. If this fails, Plan C as a family is dead. Immigration filings do not create a right to take William across a border. Taking him across anyway is a Hague wrongful removal (Canada and the US are both parties). A US court will return him; the Ontario case does not survive that. [S45]

3.2 A bona fide marriage is the only permanent immigration path that fits. Wendi can petition a spouse with no Canadian-style five-year bar. E-2 (Slovak or Omani treaty nationality) is temporary. Living in the US forever without a green card is not a plan. Routes that require concealing the company, the Canadian PR, or immigrant intent are unavailable.

3.3 Domicile is still a hard gate. The $34,150 I-864 floor is not, at $2M. Form I-864 requires a sponsor 18+, citizen or LPR, domiciled in the United States by admission, at 125% of HHS. Household of 3 (Wendi + Boris + William) is $34,150 from 1 March 2026 (48 states). [S3] No domicile = the affidavit fails even with a perfect marriage. Wendi’s own earnings are modelled at $0 in the tax table — that used to make a Kentucky joint sponsor look like the plan. At ~$2M it does not. The intending immigrant’s income may be counted if he is the petitioning spouse and it will continue from the same lawful source after LPR (AdMob/Meta/IAP can). Assets of sponsor + intending immigrant need only equal 3× the shortfall on a USC-spouse petition (about $102k if her income is $0), not 5×. [S43] Line up a Kentucky joint sponsor anyway: some consular officers dislike foreign self-employment as the sole showing. The I-864 contract still matters — it survives divorce and ends on naturalisation, 40 qualifying Social Security quarters, permanent departure after loss of LPR, or death. 8 U.S.C. §1183a. [S39] 8 CFR 213a.1–213a.2. [S27]

Public charge after 18 September 2026. DHS published a final rule (20 July 2026) rescinding the 2022 public-charge regulations, effective 18 September 2026. USCIS Policy Manual guidance of 18 August 2026 applies to I-485s postmarked or filed electronically on or after that date. Officers consider the five statutory factors (age, health, family status, assets/resources/financial status, education and skills) plus other relevant facts, including means-tested benefits. A sufficient I-864 remains required in family cases; it is no longer a regulatory “safe harbour” that ends the inquiry. CR-1 still goes through consular public-charge + I-864. This matters more if they ever choose K-1/I-485. [S40]

3B. The master gate — William’s relocation

This is not a logistics subsection. If Clayton says no and a court says no, there is no Buffalo, no CR-1-as-a-family, no Plan C. Wendi will not go without William. Do not file I-130 on the assumption a judge will override him.

Burden of proof is Clayton’s time share — Divorce Act s. 16.93

The court decides on the child’s best interests (s. 16 plus s. 16.92). It may not consider whether Wendi would move without William (s. 16.92(2)). [S8] Who has to prove what depends on the existing arrangement, if the parties substantially comply with an order, award, or agreement: [S37]

Barendregt v. Grebliunas, 2022 SCC 22: the inquiry is child-centric, not parent-centric; a move is more likely approved where the applicant was the primary parent, more likely denied in a shared arrangement; “maximum contact” is not paramount. Gordon v. Goertz, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27: “The focus is on the best interests of the child, not the interests and rights of the parents.” The 2021 amendments largely codify that line and add the s. 16.93 burdens. [S38]

What the numbers actually say — and their limits

Department of Justice Canada / CRILF, all reported English relocation decisions 1 January 2001 – 30 April 2011: 738 cases, 379 allowed = 51% for 2001–2010 as the study states it. Ontario: 193 cases, 107 allowed = 55%. [S36]

The study itself says the three reason-categories are not statistically far apart. Still: this family’s unframed reason — “Wendi’s new partner lives in Buffalo” — is the weakest category. Under s. 16.92(1)(a) the reason now is a listed factor, but only as it bears on the child’s interests. Reframe the case around William: a two-parent household he already has a relationship in, English-language public school (no Plan A language shock), a funded driving schedule that preserves Clayton’s weekends, US citizenship already in hand, Canadian citizenship that cannot lapse. Do not litigate “Wendi wants to be with Boris.”

International vs domestic: same study reported international moves allowed at 62% vs 49% inside Canada. That is a small, pre-2021, pre-Barendregt subsample with a selection effect (clearer plans, often “back home”). It is not a planning input. Keep the 51% overall baseline. The s. 16.92 factor that bites is disruption of Clayton’s time and whether the travel proposal is reasonable (location and expenses). Buffalo’s job is to make that proposal look like a weekend, not an unaccompanied flight.

Caveat on the 51%: these are reported cases from before the 2021 amendments and before Barendregt. Unreported settlements are invisible. No authoritative post-2021 aggregate exists. Use 51% as a baseline for a contested, reported application, then adjust with s. 16.93 and the actual time share.

What a child-focused Buffalo proposal actually contains

• Clayton’s parenting-time percentage, written down, before any notice is served.
• A weekend-and-holiday calendar that he can perform by car (Peace Bridge / Queenston, NEXUS, who drives, who pays — s. 7 expense).
• School district named. Paediatrician named. No “we’ll figure it out.”
• William’s Canadian passport: as of 5 November 2024, child-passport applications need proof of parentage and the participation of parents with decision-making responsibility. Even a consent move needs Clayton on the document. [S9]
• The order written to survive a later Florida/Texas move so a second relocation does not restart the war.

If Clayton has ≥40% time, do not spend I-130 money hoping a court will take a 30%-pattern case. If he is an every-other-weekend parent and Wendi has the vast majority, the burden flips and the case is a different animal. Pin the percentage. It is the one family fact that sets the legal onus.

3C. Decision tree — Clayton’s answer is a stage-gate

A second independent stage-gate: if the relationship is not clearly durable at 12 months of documented visits (March 2027), do nothing irreversible regardless of Clayton.

3D. The relationship-evidence gate — not 12 months of cohabitation

v1–v4 required “≥12 months of cohabitation with independent evidence” before anything irreversible. That gate cannot be passed lawfully:

• §4.4 forbids living in Port Hope on serial ESTAs (and, more to the point, on serial Canada visits that are actually residence).
• §4.7: cohabiting in Canada makes Boris a Canadian factual resident. At $2M that is Ontario tax plus a departure tax on the way out. Twelve months of conjugal cohabitation is also how Canada finds a common-law partner.
• Wendi cannot take William to Oman. Oman is not a Hague Abduction Convention party; Clayton would have a wrongful-removal claim the moment the aircraft left. [S45]

Replace the gate. Before anything irreversible: 12 months of documented relationship (photos, messages, travel, third-party affidavits, money trails) plus a defined in-person pattern. First cohabitation begins the day he lands as an LPR. I-751 will rest on marriage-era joint life. That is the normal file, not a defect.

Visitor day budget — Canada, not the US. Slovak nationals need a Canada eTA to fly in. [S44] He is a visitor. Working cap: ≤120 days in Canada in any 12-month period, no dwelling of his own, Oman lease and tax residence real, hotels or a spare room that is not “his.” 150 days plus a kitchen drawer starts to look like a home. Days in Port Hope are Canadian days (CRA), not US substantial-presence days. US days (ESTA: Kentucky, Buffalo house-hunting) are a separate log under IRC §7701(b). LAWFUL PLANNING if the visits are visits.

3A. Legal architecture

Same job as Plan A §2: the statutes that actually move. Not a reading list.

4. Immigration routes for Boris — ranked

Policy environment (August 2026): Slovakia is in the Visa Waiver Program (designated 17 November 2008); Oman is not. [S4] The January 2026 immigrant-visa pause covering ~75 countries does not list Slovakia or Oman (it does list, among others, Albania, Brazil, Nigeria, Thailand). [S28] Confirm against the live State list the week of filing — lists move. Public-charge inadmissibility is the I-864. Interview waivers for nonimmigrant renewals at Bratislava ended 1 January 2026; irrelevant to an immigrant visa, relevant if he ever needs a B or E visa.

4.1 CR-1 / IR-1 spouse immigrant visa — primary track

LAWFUL PLANNING — if and only if the marriage is bona fide.

Wendi (U.S. citizen) files Form I-130. After approval, NVC (DS-260, I-864, civil documents). Interview at the designated post. He enters as a lawful permanent resident and may work immediately. Married <2 years at grant → CR-1, two-year conditional card, then I-751. Married ≥2 years at grant → IR-1, 10-year card. [S1]

I-864 income (48 states, from 1 March 2026): household of 2 $27,050; 3 $34,150; 4 $41,250; 5 $48,350. Count Wendi + Boris + William (+ Children A/B as they arrive). If Wendi’s U.S. earnings are short: (i) the intending-immigrant spouse’s income may be counted if it will continue from the same lawful source after LPR — it does not have to already be US-source; (ii) assets of sponsor + intending immigrant at 3× the shortfall on a USC-spouse petition (5× is the general family rule, not this case); (iii) a joint sponsor (Kentucky family) as a spare tyre, because some officers still bounce foreign self-employment even when the arithmetic is trivial. At ~$2M the floor is not the problem. Domicile still is. [S3] [S43]

Domicile evidence officers actually want — sequenced behind the relocation, not in front of it. 8 CFR 213a.2(a)(1)(ii): if she is not yet domiciled she may still submit the I-864 if she proves she will be by admission — and then she must actually be. [S27] Admission is 2029–2030 on the stacked clock. Do not put William in a NY school or spend substantial parenting time in Buffalo before Clayton has consented or a court has authorised the move. That is itself a relocation, and it erodes the “vast majority of time” burden. Until the order exists, domicile evidence is intent: a letter, a job or teaching offer, a lease signed conditional on the order. Physical lease, NY licence, shipped household, school enrolment: NVC-complete minus weeks, after the move is authorised. A Port Hope address on the I-864 with no U.S. plan is how these cases stall. A Buffalo kitchen table before the order is how the Ontario case stalls.

Probability (conditional on a genuine marriage, complete file, Wendi actually domiciled, Slovak/Oman nationality unchanged): I-130 approval 75–90%; visa issuance 70–88%; I-751 joint 80–95% if they are still together with a joint life. [E] Drop 20–40 points if the relationship is still five months old at filing, if Clayton’s divorce is messy, or if they file from ESTA with preconceived intent (see §5).

Can he run the Oman company from the U.S. the day he lands? Yes, as an LPR — immigration status allows work, including self-employment, immediately. Tax is a separate problem (§8). Do the check-the-box or migration before the residency start date.

4.2 K-1 fiancé — faster to U.S. soil, worse for a sole founder

LAWFUL PLANNING if they are actually free to marry and intend to marry within 90 days. Do not use it just to skip the divorce-final-then-I-130 queue.

Wendi files I-129F ($675 paper; no online). They must have met in person within two years unless a custom/extreme-hardship waiver. He enters, they marry within 90 days, he files I-485 ($1,440 paper / $1,390 online per G-1055 as cited in the research brief; fee-calculator pages in 2026 sometimes list paper only — pay the live G-1055). If still married <2 years at I-485 approval → conditional residence, then I-751. [S2]

K-1 is a nonimmigrant classification. Consequences:

• He cannot work until an EAD (I-765) is in hand. For a one-person app company, “I just kept coding from the Airbnb” is unauthorised employment. AGGRESSIVE BUT ARGUABLE at best; treat as unavailable.
• Visa Integrity Fee: OBBBA (P.L. 119-21) $250 (inflation-adjusted) on nonimmigrant visa issuance. ESTA and immigrant visas are exempt. K-1 likely owes it; CR-1 does not. Implementation has been uneven across posts. [S30]
• K-1 is outside the January 2026 immigrant-visa pause (because it is nonimmigrant). Irrelevant for a Slovak, relevant as a hedge if a future pause hits Slovakia or Oman.
• If the relationship ends after entry and before I-485 approval, he has no status once the 90 days run. No immigrant-visa leftover.

Verdict: CR-1 is the correct path for someone who is the company. K-1 only if they need him on U.S. soil faster and he can pause the business or staff it for the EAD gap (he has no staff). Total K-1+AOS government fees are higher than CR-1 (I-129F + I-485 + I-765 + I-131 vs I-130 + DS-260 + immigrant fee).

4.3 Enter on ESTA, marry, adjust — not the plan

Slovak nationals are VWP. Adjustment after a VWP admission is generally barred except for immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, so a VWP-admitted spouse of a U.S. citizen may file I-485. [S4] That statutory opening is not a licence to lie.

The ESTA form asks for the purpose of travel. A planned immigration is not tourism. Willful misrepresentation of a material fact is INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) — inadmissible. Marriage fraud is 8 U.S.C. §1325(c): up to five years, $250,000, or both. [S5] The so-called 90-day rule is a Department of State presumption, not a statute; USCIS may still treat a quick marriage-and-adjust after ESTA as evidence of preconceived intent. VWP adjusters also have thinner appeal rights if CBP or USCIS goes badly.

This plan does not use ESTA as an immigration path. If he is already in the US on a genuine visit and the relationship later matures, that is a facts pattern for a lawyer, not a plan you book toward.

4.4 Visiting on ESTA while I-130 is pending

AGGRESSIVE BUT ARGUABLE as an occasional visit with a return ticket and a life in Oman. Living in Port Hope on serial ESTAs while a petition is pending is not a plan. VWP is a nonimmigrant program. Dual intent is not generally recognised.

Tax overlay: ESTA days count toward the substantial-presence test (IRC §7701(b): 31 days this year and 183-day weighted lookback). They do not, by themselves, make him a green-card resident. Track days. Do not accidentally start U.S. tax residence before the company is restructured. First-year dual-status returns are messy; the green-card test starts the day he is admitted as an LPR.

4.5 Independent hedges (if the relationship fails)

4.6 Conditional residence, I-751, naturalisation, Slovak retention

I-751: file jointly in the 90-day window before the two-year card expires. Miss it and status can be terminated. Statutory waivers exist (death; divorce after a good-faith marriage; battery or extreme cruelty; extreme hardship) — they are real, slower, and evidence-heavy. [S1] Adjudication in 2026 is often ~32.5–38 months for 80% of cases (service center vs field office; practitioner reports of USCIS times). The receipt typically extends LPR status about 48 months. Budget a multi-year conditional-residence tail. Prefer IR-1 if they can be married ≥2 years at grant. Verify egov.uscis.gov the week of filing.

Naturalisation: INA 319(a) — 3 years as LPR, living in marital union with the citizen spouse the whole 3 years, 18 months’ physical presence. Ordinary 5-year rule remains available. N-400 fee $760 paper / $710 online. [S32] [S33]

Slovak retention (Act 40/1993 as amended 1 April 2022): voluntary acquisition of a foreign citizenship generally costs Slovak citizenship the same day, except (among others) (i) foreign citizenship of a spouse acquired during the marriage, and (ii) five years’ actual permitted/registered residence in that country at the time of naturalisation, with written notice to the Ministry within 90 days. [S26] INA 319 at year 3 does not by itself satisfy (ii). Whether (i) covers a U.S. naturalisation application (as opposed to citizenship that vests by marriage in some countries) is [Q] — put it to a Bratislava citizenship lawyer before any N-400.

Conservative path: stay LPR. LPR is enough to live in the U.S. forever if he maintains residence. Do not naturalise before five years of actual U.S. residence plus a written Slovak opinion. Leaving as an LPR before he is a “long-term resident” (8 of the 15 years ending with the year residency ends) keeps the §877A door narrower. [S17]

4.7 Hybrid “Canada-first”

Idea: live together in Canada 2026–early 2028 (Boris on IEC/visitor per Plan B) while Wendi reaches citizenship eligibility (~January 2028) and the I-130 runs, interview at Montreal, then move south with Wendi a dual citizen and any child born in Canada a Canadian+Slovak(+U.S. if she transmits) citizen.

Domicile does not kill the filing. It kills admission unless she has moved. She can file I-130 from Port Hope. Direct consular filing of I-130 in Canada is exceptional-circumstances only, not the plan. Montreal is the IV post for a beneficiary resident in Canada. [S29] [S27]

The tax trap: if Boris actually lives with them in Port Hope he is a Canadian factual resident (Plan B §3). Then he emigrates to the U.S. and becomes a U.S. resident. Canada departure tax (s. 128.1(4)), then U.S. worldwide tax with no basis step-up on becoming resident. Two systems, sequentially, at full rates. The clean hybrid is: Wendi stays in Canada for citizenship days; Boris stays Oman-resident and visits; they marry after the divorce; CR-1 interview once she is ready to re-establish U.S. domicile. That preserves Oman tax until the U.S. start date and still buys her Canadian citizenship and descent for Children A/B.

Bill C-3 (first-generation limit reform): a child born outside Canada to a parent who was born in Canada or granted citizenship is first-generation by descent; the 1,095-day substantial-connection test applies to second-or-later generations born abroad on or after 15 December 2025. [S20] If Wendi is a citizen by grant at the birth, a U.S.-born child is first-generation Canadian. If she is only a PR, that child is not Canadian.

4A. The route — month by month

Plan A §4 is a single execution clock. Plan C has two clocks that must not be collapsed: the relationship clock (they met March 2026) and the execution clock (starts only after they are free to marry and Clayton’s gate is readable). Month 0 below is the start of execution, not today.

Stage 1 — reversible life. Visit under the §3D day budget, document, divorce, counsel. Nothing filed with USCIS. Boris stays Oman-resident. Wendi stays in Port Hope with William. They do not cohabit.

Stage 2 — marry and petition. Only after (i) ≥12 months of documented relationship, (ii) Ontario divorce final, (iii) Clayton’s written answer or counsel’s view of a contested case. Wendi files I-130, from Port Hope if she is still there. Boris stays outside the US.

Stage 3 — relocation, then domicile, then interview. Consent or order first. Notice timed to visa issuance. Physical NY domicile (lease, licence, school) only after the move is authorised. I-864 in the meantime is intent plus a conditional lease.

Stage 4 — admission as LPR, first cohabitation. CR-1 or IR-1 at the port. Work the same day. I-751 if conditional, built on the marriage-era file. Do not naturalise before the Slovak five-year exception is confirmed.

Do not conceieve Child A until either they are married or 300 days have run from the Ontario divorce. Plan A §2A applies here too: the presumption is the same idea in Slovak §85 and UPA §204. [S22]

4C. Stacked clocks — landing is 2029–2030, not “next year”

v1–v4 quoted “CR-1 ~16–26 months after they are free to marry” as if that were the family calendar. It is only the immigration slice. Stacked, with a working separation of ~spring 2026 (fill-in — write the real date):

Two consequences. First: Track 2 (Boris stays Oman-resident until the visa) is the default CR-1 path, not a special delay. Rushing him onto US soil via K-1 or E-2 is what costs the $0.73–0.85M/year. Second: Buffalo is the destination because a driving schedule is what makes Clayton’s consent and a s. 16.92 proposal look like a weekend. It is not because William will still be too young to fly. Florida is a live first-home option in 2029–2030 only if Clayton’s written yes is to funded non-stop UM, not to drives. His current “likely yes” was to drives.

4B. Route architecture — two gates, build redundancy

Plan A inverted its design so Wendi’s Slovak life did not hang on one untested limb. Plan C has the same shape.

Gate 1 — Boris’s status. The spine is CR-1/IR-1 on a bona fide marriage. The accelerant is marrying after two years so he skips I-751 (IR-1). The fallback if the relationship fails before filing is E-2 (temporary; Slovak or Omani treaty nationality) or staying in Oman. There is no employment-free green card behind the marriage. Do not build Gate 1 on K-1, ESTA-adjust, or Gold Card.

Gate 2 — William’s move. The spine is Clayton’s written consent, obtained through counsel as a packaged proposal, to a Buffalo relocation with a driving-based parenting schedule. The fallback is an Ontario court order on best interests (Divorce Act or CLRA — same burdens). There is no fallback in which Wendi takes him first and asks later: that is a Hague wrongful removal. Florida or Kentucky as the litigated destination is weaker on s. 16.92 contact even when he is 10; they become live after a Buffalo consent order that already contemplates a later move. If Gate 2 fails, Plan C as a family is dead and they are back in Plan B geography.

Do not rush the pregnancy. Land first. Spend 12 months of documented US life before Child A. The I-751 file and the Ontario consent order both get stronger if the child is not the reason they moved.

One structure to avoid. Do not keep the Oman corporation alive and work it from a US kitchen table. That is the ECI trap in §8.4, Plan B’s Canadian PE analogue with no treaty PE protection. Elect, migrate, or sell before the green-card start date.

5. What is not a path

Only a bona fide marriage to a US citizen produces permanent residence on these facts. A US immigration lawyer and a cross-border CPA must see the company, the Canadian PR, and the relationship as they actually are. Routes that work only by concealing those facts are unavailable. §14D names the lines; it is not a playbook for crossing them.

Lawful hedges that are not “forever”: E-2 on Slovak or Omani treaty nationality (temporary; intent to depart; a one-person ad-app shop is the harder marginal-enterprise profile). Gold Card / EO 14351 is evidence under existing EB-1/EB-2/NIW statutes, not a new visa class. A genuine FMV sale of the company, including to Vladimir with a commercial note and a real transfer of control, is in §5A — that is planning, not a nominee structure.

K-1 and ESTA-then-adjust are discussed in §4 as lawful-on-paper paths that this plan still rejects for a sole founder and for preconceived-intent risk. They are not recommended.

5A. The company — what to do with it

Plan B §6 answered this for Canada. The US answer uses the same facts (100% distributed, founder-operated, ad-concentrated) and a different grid. Pricing is unchanged: Flippa 1.2–1.8× revenue under $500k; Empire Flippers ~2.5–4× net, 15% commission; this business at the bottom of the band, ~2.5–3× net (e.g. ~$750–900k at $300k net). [E] from Plan B’s 2026 market data.

5A.1 Third-party sale before the green-card date — cleanest

LAWFUL PLANNING. Sold while he is still a non-resident alien, the gain is generally not US-taxable (no US trade or business, no US realty). Unlike Canada, the US gives no s. 128.1(1)(c) step-up on becoming resident, so selling after admission realises historical-basis gain on a US return. Segregate proceeds in a dated account the day before residency. Watch earn-outs — they convert capital into post-arrival ordinary income.

Trade-off: capital, no income, rebuild from scratch. Same as Plan B. Under ~$150k profit, advisor fees eat the structuring. Sale or keep-it-simple Schedule C; do not build Oman substance for a US move you are about to make.

5A.2 Sale to Vladimir with a vendor note

Workable, demanding, same genuineness test as Plan B §6.2. Independent valuation (siblings are IRC §267 family — losses disallowed, gains recognised). Commercial interest; a below-market note is IRC §7872. Once he is a US person, interest is taxable; principal of a real note is return of capital. If Vladimir could sell tomorrow, keep everything, and Boris would have no recourse, it is real. If the money is understood to come back, it is not a sale. Treat it as unavailable.

5A.3 Check-the-box (Form 8832) — the default if he keeps it

LAWFUL PLANNING if the entity is eligible. Deemed liquidation while he is still an NRA is generally not US-taxable. Then all income is Schedule C (or partnership) from the residency start date. File with lead time. Oman is not on the Treas. Reg. §301.7701-2(b)(8) per se list (no Omani form appears; Slovak akciová spoločnosť does). [S42] Default: a limited-liability Oman vehicle is an eligible entity. Still [Q] from the constitutive documents — do not guess from the words “free zone,” and do not file 8832 on an unlimited-liability vehicle.

5A.4 US LLC / S-corporation after arrival

Migrate the apps and payee profiles (Google Play transfer, AdMob/Meta, W-8BEN-E → W-9) before old profiles close — same plumbing as Plan B. Reasonable compensation on payroll; remainder K-1, not self-employment tax. IRS attacks a low salary. Pays once profit is high enough that SE on the whole stream costs more than payroll on a defensible wage — often around $300k+. LAWFUL PLANNING with a real payroll and a real salary memo.

5A.5 Keep the Oman corporation as a CFC — usually a trap

On paper: NCTI, no QBAI after 2025, Form 5471, ordinary rates, no 40% §250 unless §962. Sometimes a lower federal number than Schedule C because there is no SE tax. On these facts it is not a real option: he is the only worker, and he will be on US soil. That is US trade or business / ECI, no treaty PE protection, 21% + 30% branch-profits ≈ 44.7% federal at the corporate level before personal tax. Do not “wait and see.”

Hiring Oman staff to manufacture substance while he codes from Buffalo is the Plan B §6.3 caveat again: real functions, or AGGRESSIVE BUT ARGUABLE at best. A genuine local manager who actually runs ASO, support and ads is a different fact pattern than a cousin on paper.

5A.6 The gift question — settled the same way as Plan B

Occasional genuine gifts from money that is legally Vladimir’s: LAWFUL, with Form 3520 above $100,000. Regular transfers sized to the mortgage are not gifts. CRS still applies. A vendor note is strictly better — it gives Boris a legal right rather than dependence on generosity.

Keep Wendi out of company ownership — Plan B §7.5, carried. Not because of automatic GILTI while he is an NRA (§958(b)(1) blocks attribution from an NRA), but because the day he is a US person the CFC analysis flips, and her 5471 burden is pointless complexity. Do not make the §6013(g) election while he is still a non-resident — it would pull his worldwide income into her 1040 a year early.

6. Wendi — Canada exit, U.S. re-entry

6.1 Keep or abandon Canadian PR

IRPA s. 28: 730 days in each five-year period, with listed exceptions (accompanying a Canadian-citizen spouse; employment abroad by a Canadian business). For a PR under 5 years, it is enough at examination to show she will be able to meet 730 days in the five years after becoming a PR. [S19] She has ~210 days; she needs 730 by ~January 2031. On a 2027 move that was ~130 days/year in Ontario. On a 2029–2030 landing she has more calendar left in Canada before the move, which is the honest way to bank days: stay until citizenship (~Jan 2028 application) then go, rather than commute 130 days a year from a NY school. Commuting William out of district a third of the year, or leaving Boris and a US household a third of the year, fights I-864 domicile, schooling, and the stable-home narrative the relocation case needs. Kentucky, Florida, Texas do not bank PR days at all. Honest choices: Hybrid, or let PR lapse. Citizenship is the only status that cannot be lost to absence.

Formal renunciation vs lapse: lapse is discovered at a PR card renewal or a CBSA examination and can end in a departure order. Citizenship is the only status that cannot be lost to absence. Clayton’s sponsorship undertaking runs ~January 2029 and survives divorce; it is about social assistance, not the Canada Child Benefit.

6.2 Wait for Canadian citizenship, then move — often free on the stacked clock

Buys: lifelong Canadian fallback; Children A/B can be Canadian by descent if born after the grant (Bill C-3 first generation through a parent who was granted citizenship). [S20] On a 2029–2030 landing, an application ~January 2028 sits inside the I-130 wait if she stays in Canada. It is not an extra 17-month delay on top of CR-1. Costs: remaining in Port Hope through 2028 (William’s Ontario school, which is also what the relocation case wants until the order). Citizenship does not lift IRPR s. 130(3) — she still cannot sponsor Boris to Canada until ~January 2031. Do not “bank 130 days/year from Buffalo” as a substitute — see C25.

January 2028 as an application date is arithmetic from a January 2026 landing + continuous presence + full 365-day pre-PR credit. Confirm her visitor-status continuity. The oath is not automatic on the eligibility date.

6.3 Canadian tax emigration

Ceasing Canadian tax residence: deemed disposition of most property at FMV (ITA s. 128.1(4)), with listed exclusions (including property owned when last becoming resident if resident 60 months or less in the 10 years before emigration — Wendi’s facts may fit; [Q] with a Canadian CPA). File NR73 if they want CRA’s view. Canada Child Benefit requires tax residence. OHIP: 153 days in Ontario in any 12-month period, Ontario as primary residence; more than 212 days out can require reapplication. [S23]

6.4 Ontario divorce and remarriage

A Canadian divorce takes effect on the 31st day after the judgment, unless shortened or appealed. [S21] One-year separation is the usual ground. Uncontested timeline and cost: [Q] Ontario family lawyer. She is not free to marry (and not free to file I-130 as a spouse, or I-129F as a fiancé who is legally free to marry) until that date. The 300-day paternity clocks (Slovak §85 and UPA §204) run from finality. Finalise the divorce as early as the one-year rule allows. Separation date is still a fill-in.

6.5 Her work, I-864, ACA

She may work in the U.S. immediately as a citizen. Online English teaching is lawful. Her earnings help I-864, household ACA premiums, and the budget. Enhanced ACA premium tax credits expired at the end of 2025; 2026 average monthly net premiums rose 58% ($113 → $178) and average Marketplace deductibles rose 37% to $3,786. [S24] At the profit bands in §8 they will not be on CHIP/Medicaid; they will buy a Marketplace plan or private coverage. Childbirth out-of-pocket is then deductible + coinsurance up to the plan maximum — county-level 2026 figures are [Q].

7. William — the relocation, the flights, the visits

7.1 Ontario relocation law

A person with parenting time or decision-making responsibility who intends a “relocation” (a change of residence likely to have a significant impact on the child’s relationship with a person who has parenting time, decision-making, a pending application, or contact) must give at least 60 days’ notice on Form 1: expected date, new address, contact information, a proposal for how parenting time / decision-making / contact could be exercised. [S7] SOR/2020-249.

The move proceeds on the noticed date only if a court authorises it, or if every notified person with parenting time or decision-making does not object within 30 days (Form 2 or an application) and no order forbids it. On a contest the court uses Divorce Act s. 16 plus s. 16.92 (reasons, impact, time spent, notice compliance, geographic-area orders, reasonableness of the travel proposal including location and expenses, compliance history). The court may not consider whether the moving parent would go without the child. Burden: equal-time + substantial compliance → mover proves the move is in the child’s best interests; vast majority of time → objector proves it is not; otherwise both. The court may apportion travel costs.

If there is no Divorce Act parenting order and no live corollary-relief proceeding, Ontario’s Children’s Law Reform Act ss. 39.1–39.4 governs instead (in force March 2021). Same 60-day notice, 30-day objection, relocation factors at s. 39.4(3), court shall not consider whether the mover would go without the child (s. 39.4(4)), burdens at ss. 39.4(5)–(7) mirroring Divorce Act s. 16.93. Married / divorcing → Divorce Act; otherwise CLRA. The parenting-time share is the controlling variable under either statute. [S46] Counsel still files the right originating process; the analysis does not change.

Canadian child-passport applications need all parents/guardians, all in-force parenting and passport-specific documents, and proof of parentage (required as of 5 November 2024). IRCC may contact the other parent. [S9] U.S. minor-passport two-parent appearance / DS-3053 rules: travel.state.gov was blocked this session — treat two-parent consent as the working rule. [Q]

7.2 Cross-border child support

Ontario FRO enforces with every U.S. state as an ISO reciprocating jurisdiction; Ontario lists the U.S. among 2007 Hague Child Support Convention partners (Ontario implementation 1 February 2024). U.S. OCSE uses UIFSA 2008 and Hague channels. If one party still lives in Ontario, Ontario generally keeps authority to vary the order (continuing exclusive jurisdiction). [S10] Travel costs can be a s. 7 expense in the consent order. Write the order as if they live in Buffalo and as if they later live in Florida, so a second move does not restart a war.

Do not budget Clayton’s table amount as a stable offset. The table is set on his income, but Ontario can vary it. Once William lives in NY in a household at this income, Clayton can seek a s. 10 undue-hardship / standard-of-living comparison, a s. 7 reallocation, or a s. 9 set-off if his nights increase because of the driving schedule. Expect support to fall. “Keep Clayton as the primary support debtor” is still the right legal posture (do not adopt William; do not volunteer Boris as the table payor). It is not a cash-flow forecast.

7.3 Access logistics and flying alone

A passport is required for flights to or from the United States. Air Canada [S11]:

William is 7 (born ~2019). He cannot fly alone until ~2027. “Flying on his own to visit his father” therefore means:

1. Now–age 8 (~2027): an adult on the aircraft, or a car. There is no airline product that substitutes.
2. Ages 8–11 (~2027–2030/31): Air Canada UM on a non-stop to YYZ (or another non-stop into Toronto), plus an adult at each end. Connecting through Montreal or a U.S. hub is not allowed on UM. Alternative: still drive.
3. Age 12+ (~2031): he may fly without UM. Still needs a passport, a consent letter from both parents for international flights, and a parenting order that says so.

Other airlines have their own age floors (often 8, sometimes 5 with UM). Do not assume WestJet, Porter, or a U.S. carrier will take a 7-year-old. Porter / Billy Bishop and many U.S. regional routes are connecting or not AC-operated — they fail the Air Canada UM rule even when he is 8.

Land border — the actual solution, in Plan A §8’s level of detail.

Frequency, if they live in Buffalo: not 1.5 long-haul trips a year (Plan A). Weekends and holidays by car, plus longer blocks at Christmas and summer. Write the consent order as a driving schedule: Clayton fetches Friday after school, returns Sunday; or they meet at a QEW service centre. Frequency is a fact Clayton can live with. That is why Buffalo is the only Plan C home that is not a fight dressed up as a parenting plan.

Geography. Port Hope is ~100 km / ~1h15 east of Toronto on the 401. Buffalo is ~160 km / ~1h45–2h southwest of Toronto via the QEW and the Peace Bridge (Fort Erie ↔ Buffalo). End-to-end Port Hope → Buffalo is about 260 km, ~3 hours in light traffic, 3.5–4.5 hours with 401/QEW congestion and a border queue. [E] Travelmath ~3 hours / 160 miles; Toronto–Buffalo itself is the Peace Bridge default. Rush hours (roughly 06:00–10:00 and 15:00–19:00 through Toronto) add the most time. Lake-effect snow on the QEW and I-90 in winter is real — build a weather clause into the order, not a “he’ll fly if it snows” clause that then hits the under-8 rule.

The crossing. Peace Bridge is the default from this corridor: QEW dumps onto it, NEXUS lane exists, US-bound from Toronto ~1h45. When Peace is stacked (Bills home games, holiday weekends), Queenston–Lewiston is the usual reroute, ~18 minutes further north. Rainbow Bridge is for Niagara Falls tourist traffic — do not make it the parenting plan. Passport required (William is a dual citizen — carry both). Consent letter from the other parent when only one adult is in the car. NEXUS for Wendi and Clayton is worth the appointment: it is the difference between a 3-hour trip and a 5-hour trip on a bad Sunday. [E]

Door to door, Buffalo home → Clayton. Leave Amherst/Clarence/Grand Island ~14:00 Friday, Peace Bridge, QEW, 401 east, Port Hope ~17:30–18:30. Return Sunday after lunch. That is a child-shaped weekend. Clayton can also drive west and take him — then Wendi is not on the road every time. Put who drives and who pays gas/NEXUS/tolls in the order as a s. 7 expense.

Cost, Buffalo (drive) [E]:

Compare Plan A’s Vienna–Toronto UM at €1,300–1,900/year for 1.5 trips, and only from age 8. Buffalo is cheaper and more frequent and works at age 7.

If they live in Florida or Kentucky instead — this is Plan A’s long-haul problem, with worse UM constraints because the origin airport may not have an Air Canada non-stop to YYZ.

Non-stop YYZ grid: Florida (MCO/FLL/MIA/TPA typically yes), Texas (DFW/IAH typically yes), Kentucky (SDF often no — CVG may; [Q] the season they need it). A Kentucky home plus “he’ll fly UM” is a weak plan until someone has printed the actual non-stop grid for that week. Connecting flights are not Air Canada UM, full stop. [S11]

Have the Ontario consent order allocate these costs explicitly. Courts commonly treat access travel as a s. 7 special expense shared in proportion to income. Write the order as if they live in Buffalo and as if they later live in Florida, so a second move does not restart a war.

7.4 School, health, step-parent exposure

U.S. public-school enrolment is residency-based (lease + birth certificate + immunisations + prior Ontario records). Mid-year enrolment is normal. William is a U.S. citizen — no immigration issue at the school door.

Health: U.S.-citizen child of a self-employed family, Marketplace or CHIP. At the profit bands in §8, CHIP/Medicaid is unlikely; budget a family Marketplace plan. ACA 2026 is more expensive than 2025. [S24]

Boris as a step-parent. Canada: if he stands in the place of a parent, Divorce Act s. 2(2) / Chartier; he cannot unilaterally withdraw; FCSG s. 5 then sets an amount having regard to the Guidelines and the other parent’s duty — not automatically the full table. [S12] New York: generally no post-divorce step-parent support without adoption; during marriage, Family Court Act §415 can order a “fair and reasonable sum” only if the stepchild is a public-assistance recipient under 21 — not this household at $2M. The NY obligation, such as it is, ends when the marriage ends. [S48] Other states [Q]. Do not adopt William. A prenup cannot bargain away a child’s claim. Living as a family creates Chartier facts; trying to live in the same house while legally pretending he is a roommate is both ugly and a poor I-751 file. If the goal is “as little as possible into William, as much as possible for A and B,” do not share William’s home — §14C. If they share a roof anyway, keep Clayton as the primary support debtor in the Ontario order and do not hold out as “dad.”

7B. Schooling — the opposite of Plan A’s problem

Plan A’s largest child-facing risk was an English-only seven-year-old dropped into a Slovak municipal school. Plan C does not have that problem. William is a US citizen, already in an English school system, and Erie County / Niagara County public schools teach in English. Enrolment is residency (lease + birth certificate + immunisations + Ontario records). Mid-year is normal. There is no immigration issue at the school door.

What is the risk: a mid-year move, a new friend group, and a parenting schedule that puts him in a car across a border most Fridays. That is survivable. It is not Senec. Pick the suburb for the district, not the skyline — Amherst, Clarence, Williamsville, Grand Island, Lewiston are the search list; do not default to a random Buffalo ZIP. Ratings, special-ed, and start dates are [Q] locally before the lease.

Health: US-citizen child of a self-employed family. At the profit bands in §8 they will not qualify for CHIP/Medicaid; budget a family Marketplace plan. 2026 is more expensive than 2025 (enhanced credits expired). [S24] Childbirth for A and B is then deductible + coinsurance up to the plan out-of-pocket maximum — county-level 2026 figures are [Q]. Two planned births is a real number in the US in a way it is not in Slovakia’s public system; do not copy Plan A’s near-zero delivery cost into this budget.

7C. William’s options at 18

He arrives at 18 as a US citizen and a Canadian citizen already. That is a stronger position than Plan A, which had to manufacture Slovak citizenship for him.

• United States — citizen. In-state tuition if they have been New York (or Florida) residents; federal aid. No immigration clock.
• Canada — citizen. Status cannot lapse through absence. He can return, work, and study in Canada at any point without conditions. Ontario tuition as a citizen, not as an international student.
• Slovakia / EU — only if Boris’s paternity of William is not the path (it isn’t) and William later naturalises, or if a sibling’s Slovak citizenship somehow helped, which it does not. Plan C does not give William EU citizenship. Children A and B get it by descent from Boris. William does not, unless a separate Slovak naturalisation is run later. Say that plainly: choosing C over A trades William’s EU option for keeping Clayton in driving distance.
• Intention is to retain all citizenships he holds. US and Canadian sides are unproblematic. If he ever naturalises Slovak, confirm dual-citizenship retention the other direction before he files.

8. Tax — compute, don’t assert

Planning analysis, not advice. A cross-border CPA must sign off before any election or sale. Assumptions for the numbers below are listed so they can be rebuilt.

8.1 When U.S. tax residence starts

Green-card test: resident from the day he is admitted as an LPR. Substantial-presence test: 31 days this year and 183-day weighted lookback (this year + ⅓ last year + ⅙ the year before). ESTA visits in 2026–27 count. First year may be dual-status. Closer-connection / treaty tie-breaker: there is no U.S.–Oman income-tax treaty, so no treaty residence article. Slovakia’s treaty exists but he is not Slovak-resident. [S14] Do not visit enough in 2026–27 to trip substantial presence before the company is restructured.

The U.S. gives no basis step-up on becoming resident (unlike Canada s. 128.1(1)(c) in Plan B). Whatever is unrealised on the day before residency remains unrealised, with historical basis.

8.2 Pre-immigration checklist — do this while still an NRA

1. Decide keep / sell / check-the-box. Default for a founder who will work from the U.S.: check-the-box or migrate. Default if he does not want U.S. tax on the stream: sell to a third party before the start date (Plan B §6.1 pricing still holds: ~2.5–3× net at the bottom of the band).
2. Form 8832 check-the-box. A deemed liquidation while he is still an NRA is generally not U.S.-taxable (no U.S. trade or business, no U.S. realty). Oman is absent from Treas. Reg. §301.7701-2(b)(8); a limited-liability free-zone vehicle is the usual eligible-entity profile, still confirmed from the constitutive documents (LLC vs SAOC vs SAOG vs unlimited). [S42] File 8832 with enough lead time; late elections are their own mess. At $2M of value, the deemed liquidation is a large number even if it is not US-taxable — get the Oman/corporate opinion the same week.
3. Distribute accumulated profits before residency if the entity will remain a corporation (so they are NRA-source, not later dividends). If it will be disregarded, the timing matters less federally but still matters for Oman/KYC.
4. PFIC screen any cash-heavy entity. An operating app company is usually not a PFIC; a box of cash with no business is.
5. Sale to Vladimir: FMV, independent valuation, commercial interest, §7872 if below-market, §267 (siblings — losses disallowed, gains recognised). Installment note: U.S. will tax interest after he is resident.
6. Do not start performing the company’s work from U.S. soil while it is still a foreign corporation. That is the ECI trap (§8.4).
7. Platform plumbing (Google Play transfer, AdMob/Meta payee, W-8BEN-E → W-9 at residency) live before old profiles close — same as Plan B.

8.3 Structure options once he is a U.S. person

8.4 The ECI trap — the structure that really is worse than Canada

If the Oman company remains a foreign corporation and Boris, its only worker, performs the work from U.S. soil, the company itself may have a U.S. trade or business and effectively connected income (IRC §§864, 882). There is no treaty PE protection. Federal corporate tax 21% plus 30% branch-profits tax on the dividend-equivalent amount ≈ 44.7% combined federal at the corporate level, before any individual tax on a salary, before state franchise/income tax, before 5471. This is the Plan B “Canadian PE analogue,” and it is worse. Do not “wait and see.” Elect or migrate before the start date, or sell.

8.5 Effective-tax comparison

Assumptions [E], rates [S]: 2026 MFJ, standard deduction $32,200; brackets per Rev. Proc. 2025-32 / P.L. 119-21 (10% to $24,800, 12% to $100,800, 22% to $211,400, 24% to $403,550, 32% to $512,450, 35% to $768,700, 37% thereafter). SS wage base 2026 $184,500. [S35] Additional Medicare 0.9% above $250,000 MFJ. Child tax credit $2,200 base (OBBBA; 2026 inflation step [Q]), phase-out $400,000 MFJ — gone at $1M and $2M. One qualifying child (William) only helps the $150–$300k rows. Wendi’s earned income modelled at $0 so the table isolates the company. QBI 20% with 2026 MFJ threshold ~$403,500 and $150,000 phase-in; Schedule C has $0 W-2 wages so QBI is gone by $1M. No NIIT on material-participation Schedule C. No state tax in the FL/TX column. New York: Erie/Niagara County — not NYC or Yonkers. 2025 published MFJ 6.85% through $2,155,350; 9.65% starts above that; high-AGI recapture of lower brackets. At $2M they are still in the 6.85% band, not 10.9%. [S24] Ontario column uses Plan B / T4032-ON 2026 federal 14/20.5/26/29/33% (top over $258,482 CAD) plus Ontario 5.05–13.16% plus surtax, FX 1.35 CAD/USD [E]. That Ontario number is the worst-case fully-distributed personal rate, not an optimised CCPC with the small-business deduction and deferral. Directional US-beats-Ontario survives; the margin shrinks if a Canadian founder would have retained inside a CCPC.

$2M row, so it can be recomputed [E]: SE tax = 12.4% × $184,500 + 2.9% × $2,000,000 + 0.9% × $1,750,000 = $96,628. Half-SE deduction $48,314. No QBI. No CTC. Taxable income = $2,000,000 − $32,200 − $48,314 = $1,919,486. Federal income tax on 2026 MFJ brackets ≈ $632,374. Federal + SE ≈ $729,000 (36.5%). NY state on Erie County residence, 6.85% band with recapture, not NYC: ≈ $0.12–0.14M. All-in Buffalo ≈ $0.85–0.87M (42–44%). Florida save versus Buffalo is that NY slice (~$120–140k), not $150–200k. Vs remaining Oman-resident the cost is the whole $0.73M (FL) to $0.85M (Buffalo).

S-corp at $300k with a defensible $120k salary: roughly 18% effective federal+payroll [E], ~2 points better than Schedule C, with IRS salary risk. At $2M an S-corp still pays ordinary rates on the K-1; the save is SE tax on the amount above a defensible salary (the $96k SE bill, not the $632k income tax). CFC/NCTI without ECI at $300k can print a lower federal number (~17% if no SE and limited NIIT) — and is not a real option if he works from Buffalo. ECI-on-a-foreign-corp is the 45% disaster.

The 19–23% headline is the $150–$500k band, and it depends on 8832 eligibility or a US pass-through. At $2M the comparable headline is ~36.5% FL / ~42–44% Buffalo. If the Oman entity is somehow not eligible, re-run under NCTI — and under ECI if he works it from Buffalo. Do not commit to “US tax beats Canada” until a CPA has read the constitutive documents. Do not commit to “tax is not a reason to wait” until you have priced Track 2 against Track 1.

Plan B’s “worse than Canada” verdict is reversed for a pass-through at every band in this table, including $2M. It remains true if they sit in New York on a foreign corporation they work from the kitchen table. Vs Oman, US residence is the expensive choice at this income. State choice and the 8832 election are the plan, not a footnote.

Michigan 4.25% flat sits close to Kentucky. Washington/Nevada match Florida on individual income tax; Washington has other business taxes to check. [S24]

8.6 Reporting and exit

• FBAR if aggregate foreign accounts >$10,000 at any time.
• Form 8938 (FATCA) — 2026 thresholds not re-read this session; assume it bites. [Q]
• 5471 / 8858 / 8865 as the structure dictates. 5471: $10,000 per period + up to $50,000 after notice. [S16]
• Form 3520: gifts >$100,000 from an NRA individual or foreign estate. Penalty 5% per month, cap 25%.
• Accountant: a U.S. international CPA, annually. [Q] Budget more than a domestic 1040.
• §877A: covered expatriate if average net income tax for the five years before expatriation >$211,000 (2026), or net worth ≥$2 million, or failure to certify 5 years’ compliance. Long-term resident = LPR in at least 8 taxable years during the 15-year period ending with the year residency ends. 2026 gain exclusion $910,000. [S17] Decision fork at year 7 as LPR: stay for good, or leave before long-term-resident status if a later Slovakia/Canada life is still live.
• Estate/gift: unlimited marital deduction does not apply to a non-citizen spouse unless the property passes in a QDOT or the survivor becomes a citizen under §2056(d)(4). [S24] Once Boris is an LPR/citizen this eases; while he is still an NRA, Wendi’s planning is the QDOT problem in reverse. Prenup (§11).

8.7 Oman and Slovakia residuals

Oman residence is typically tied to the company/investor visa — confirm zone, licence term, and what happens to the card, the licence, and the bank if he is physically in the U.S. most of the year. [Q] Banks KYC “where do you live.” Slovak tax residency: he has deregistered trvalý pobyt; keep day counts, no dwelling available to him, Oman (then U.S.) certificates. Slovak health-insurance deregistration still unconfirmed — arrears possible. Pre-15 November 2021 Slovak years: no Slovakia–Oman treaty shield (Plan B open item, still open).

9. Where in the United States

The brief asked for a real comparison, not a list. William’s access to Clayton is weighted first; tax second; Wendi’s Kentucky family third.

Recommend: Buffalo–Niagara (Amherst, Clarence, Grand Island, Lewiston, Lockport, North Tonawanda — not downtown crime-anxiety, a suburb with a good district). It is the destination that makes Clayton’s consent and a s. 16.92 proposal look like a weekend. At a 2029–2030 landing William is 10–11; the under-8 rule is already gone; UM has a year or two left. Accept New York state tax as the price of the drive. Pearson remains the Europe/Oman airport. Do not sell Buffalo as a way to bank 130 PR days — that fights school and domicile; take the Hybrid (citizenship ~2028, then the move) or let PR lapse. Runner-up: Tampa Bay, Florida, as a first home only if Clayton’s written yes is to funded non-stop UM rather than to drives, and as a year-3+ home if the Buffalo order already contemplates it. Kentucky wins on family and cost and loses on the relocation case.

County-level 2026 ACA childbirth out-of-pocket, rents for a family of 4–5, and school ratings were not inspected as primary sources this round — quote locally before signing a lease. [Q]

10. Budget model

USD, 2026. Offsets: Clayton’s child support (table amount continues; [Q] the number) and CTC $2,200 per qualifying child until phase-out.

One-time setup

Annual running — family of four, Buffalo, USD [E]

Verified government fees are in the setup table. These running figures are planning estimates. Tax on the company is not in the household total — it is §8.5, and it is the large number.

Mid is the planning figure for a Buffalo rental with unsubsidised family silver and a driving schedule. Full is a purchase plus a second child in paid care. Lean is tight and assumes Wendi is home. Health is the line that moved in v5: no premium tax credit at these MAGI bands.

Offsetting: Clayton’s child support under the Federal Child Support Guidelines, enforceable into every US state [S10] — [Q] the table amount; child tax credit $2,200 per qualifying child until the $400,000 MFJ phase-out [S34]. No Slovak child allowance. No Canada Child Benefit once Wendi is a US tax resident and not a Canadian one.

Florida instead of Buffalo: drop NY income tax (see §8.5) and replace William’s $1,200–2,400 driving line with $1,200–2,700 of flights and escorts until age 8, then UM. The tax save is real at $300k+; the parenting schedule gets worse. Do not budget Florida as if the Buffalo travel line still applies.

Boris’s own pre-admission costs, separately: Muscat/Vienna ↔ Toronto visits, hotels, ESTA days tracked so he does not trip substantial presence. Roughly $3,000–6,000/year for 3–5 visits [E] until the visa. He should not start a US household before the I-864 domicile moment — that is Wendi’s job, timed to the interview.

11. The marriage question — the objection is not tax

Boris’s stated reason for not marrying was preserving a Gulf tax position. Plan A killed that for Slovakia (marriage is not a Slovak tax-residence trigger). Plan C does not kill it against remaining Oman-resident at ~$2M: US residence is the tax event, and it costs on the order of $0.73–0.85M/year [E]. Marriage is still the only permanent immigration path. The honest question is whether the same house is worth that number the year he lands (Track 1 vs staying Oman until the visa — which the stacked clock already does). Rushing him in on K-1 or E-2 is what costs ~$0.73–0.85M/year early. Do not refuse a bona fide marriage in order to dodge tax if they have already chosen to live in the US. Do not pretend the Gulf position is free once he is a US person.

Marriage is what makes Plan C exist

Unlike Plan A, where marriage did not open the spousal residence limb unless Boris held Slovak trvalý pobyt, a US citizen can petition a spouse with no equivalent of IRPR s. 130(3) and no need for Boris to have a prior US home. The spousal I-130 is the route. Unmarried, he is a visitor or, at best, an E-2. That is not “forever.”

Tax itself, once they pick a no-tax-state pass-through or accept NY tax as the price of Buffalo, is better than Ontario at every band in §8.5, including $2M. It is worse than Oman at every band. Marrying to live in the US does not create the US tax; living in the US creates it. He can be unmarried and still trip substantial presence. The objection that survives is “do not become a US person until you mean it,” not “do not marry.”

The real costs

This, not tax, is what he should be weighing: a federal support contract that outlives a divorce, New York or Texas property law over future app income, and a bona-fides file that will be read again at I-751. Money problems have instruments (prenup, joint sponsor, S-corp). A five-month relationship filing an I-130 next month does not.

Where to marry, and the 300-day clock

After the Ontario divorce is final (day 31). US marriage (NY or KY) is the cleanest for I-130 optics. Canada is fine if they are still in Port Hope; apostille as needed. Slovakia: extra paperwork. Oman: often slower to document. A valid foreign marriage is generally recognised in the US if valid where celebrated.

Marrying before Child A is born is the clean Slovak §85(2) and UPA §204 answer even if birth is still inside 300 days of Clayton. Act 97/1963 §23 (parentage by the child’s citizenship at birth) is circular on these facts. Practical plan: marry; give birth in the US; US birth certificate names Boris; register Slovak citizenship by descent at the embassy in Washington. [S22]

Birthright. A child born in the US to a US-citizen mother is a citizen at birth. That does not depend on Boris’s status. Trump v. Barbara (30 June 2026) and the 6 August 2026 follow-on order are about other people’s children. [S22] Wendi’s INA §301(g) physical presence (5 years, 2 after 14) is needed only for children born abroad. Born in the US, it is moot. Still worth documenting if they ever deliver in Canada or Slovakia.

The actual trade

Plan A could delay marriage because paternity could be solved by waiting out 300 days, and Wendi’s Slovak residence did not need Boris as a spouse. Plan C cannot delay marriage without delaying Boris’s status. The costs of marrying are I-864, property, and a federal fraud statute if they fake it. The cost of not marrying is that Plan C does not exist. Sequence it behind 12 months and a final divorce, then do it for real.

12. Practicalities for Boris

• SSN: as an LPR, on entry or shortly after at SSA. Needed for W-9, banks, credit, Marketplace.
• Driver’s licence: NY DMV will want SSN, proof of identity, NY residency. Credit history starts at zero — first car is cash or a large down payment; get a secured card the week the SSN arrives.
• Banking: a U.S. citizen spouse helps. Bring the I-551 stamp / card, passport, lease. Foreign-source income is a KYC conversation, not a bar. Keep the Oman account until payee profiles have been migrated, then decide whether Oman still needs it for the licence.
• Health before the card is in hand: on CR-1 he is an LPR at the port of entry. Marketplace eligibility follows. K-1: gap until I-485/EAD — private travel policy, not a plan.
• Slovak passport: keep it valid. LPR absences: <6 months is usually fine; 6–12 months invites questions; ≥1 year generally needs a re-entry permit (I-131) filed before leaving. A life that is still half Muscat will look like abandonment. If they might return to Slovakia, do it as a trip, not a second home, until the I-751 is done.
• Naturalisation: see §4.6. Optional. Dangerous for Slovak citizenship if done at year 3. Dangerous for §877A if he later wants out after becoming a long-term resident or a citizen.

13. Failure cases and reversibility

Same discipline as Plan B §9. The relationship is five months old. A seven-year-old is in the middle.

Reversible now: the September visit, day-count logs, French is irrelevant here, gathering Wendi’s 1040s, asking Clayton nothing irreversible, a consult with a U.S. immigration lawyer and a cross-border CPA, an independent valuation of the apps, documenting the relationship.

Irreversible: marriage, I-130/I-129F filing (not legally irreversible but practically a bell you cannot un-ring cleanly), selling the company, 8832 once filed, establishing U.S. tax residence, Wendi dropping Canadian days, a relocation the court has ordered, conceiving Child A inside the 300-day window without having married, U.S. naturalisation.

Order: nothing irreversible before ≥12 months of documented relationship (photos, messages, travel, third-party affidavits — not cohabitation) and Clayton’s written answer or counsel’s view of a contested case and a final (or clearly uncontested) divorce timeline. First cohabitation is at LPR landing.

13A. Family resilience — what happens when something goes wrong

Plan A §12A’s test: an immigration plan that only works while the relationships hold is not a plan.

• If Boris and Wendi separate after he is an LPR: he may keep LPR (especially after I-751, or on an IR-1). I-864 still binds Wendi. Children A and B, if born in the US, remain US citizens. Their Slovak citizenship by descent does not depend on the marriage continuing. William remains Clayton’s child. Boris’s in-loco exposure is the fight.
• If they separate during conditional residence: I-751 joint filing dies. The bona-fide-marriage waiver is real if the marriage was genuine. It is slow. Budget a lawyer. Do not invent abuse.
• If Clayton refuses and the court refuses: Wendi cannot take William. She will not go without him. Plan C stops. Plan B geography is the residue. Do not file I-130 on the assumption a judge will fix Gate 2.
• If the company dies after he is a US person: he is an LPR with a 1040 and no income. That is survivable. It is not a reason to skip the pre-immigration 8832/sale. It is a reason not to become a covered expatriate in a panic — leave before year 8 if the US life is no longer the plan.
• If Wendi dislikes Buffalo: Florida is a year-3 decision, after William is 8 and Clayton has actually been doing the drives. Moving twice without a clause in the Ontario order is how you end up in court again.
• If William wants to return to Canada at 16–18: he is a Canadian citizen. He can. That is a feature, not a failure. Put it in the parenting order as a possibility so it is not a surprise.

The underlying test is the same as Plan A: could Wendi run this life next week if Boris were unreachable? In Plan C that means: her own US citizenship, William’s US and Canadian citizenships, a lease in her name, a Marketplace plan in her name, and Clayton’s support order. Boris’s LPR is his. It should not be the family’s only roof.

14. Plan A vs B vs C vs Hybrid

Decision framework

• If Clayton will not consent and a court will not move William: Plan C is not available as a family. Stay in Plan B geography. Do not marry-for-U.S. and leave William behind — she will not, and the court is not allowed to assume she will.
• If speed of Boris’s secure status is the weight: Plan C, CR-1, Buffalo. Nothing else is close.
• If tax at $300k+ is the weight and Clayton is easy: Plan C in Florida (or TX) still beats Plan B on tax; Plan A still beats both for Boris’s rate if he can remain Oman-resident, which is the whole point of A and requires Wendi to raise the children in Senec.
• If William’s childhood with Clayton is the weight: Plan B, or Plan C-Buffalo. Not Senec, not Louisville, not Tampa until he is older.
• If Wendi’s Canadian citizenship and the children’s third passport are the weight: Hybrid, Boris remaining Oman-resident until her oath, then CR-1 to Buffalo.
• If the relationship is still a five-month fact: do not pick A, B, or C this month. Visit under the §3D day budget. Document. Do not ask Clayton about Buffalo until Ontario counsel has a packaged proposal. Revisit at 12 months of documented visits (March 2027).

14A. Decision framework — as a function of annual profit

Still the missing number. Locate yourself. This is Plan B §10, rewritten for a US landing.

14B. Menu of other ways — ~$2M to Boris, Clayton likely yes to drives

Not one verdict. Parallel tracks. Assumption: “the company makes $2M a year, everything paid to Boris” means ~$2M net reaches him. If that is revenue, say so — the tax and sale numbers collapse.

Parenting time, in plain language. Clayton does not “own a share” of William. William is Clayton’s son. Canadian law asks how much of William’s ordinary life is already spent in Clayton’s care — nights in a two-week stretch, not a moral score. That calendar is what s. 16.93 uses to decide who must prove a move is (or isn’t) good for William. If Clayton has him every other weekend, a 3-hour drive to Buffalo is a small change. If they already split weeks, the same move is a large change. Write the actual nights down. You do not need to agree that he “should” have them; the court will count them anyway. Clayton “likely yes if the driving schedule is real” may mean you never go to court — still write the calendar into the consent order so a later fight has a map.

Track 1 — Buffalo CR-1 (original Plan C)

Clayton’s likely yes is the whole game — still a prediction, not a signed consent order. CR-1, Wendi domiciled in Erie/Niagara County, weekends by car. At $2M, New York tax is no longer a footnote: federal+SE on a full distribution is ~$0.73M (≈36.5%) [E]; Erie County NY adds on the order of ~$0.12–0.14M (6.85% band, not NYC 10.9%). Buffalo all-in ~42–44%. Florida ~36.5% — about $120–140k/year less — but the “likely yes” was to drives, not to flights. Write the order so a later Florida move when William is 12 does not restart litigation. 8832 is likely available (Oman not on the per se list) and still read from the documents; do not work an un-elected Oman corporation from Buffalo.

Track 2 — Stay Oman-resident until the CR-1 lands (default on the stacked clock)

Each year he is not a US tax resident at $2M is on the order of ~$0.73M vs Florida / ~$0.85M vs Buffalo [E]. On the stacked clock he is not an LPR until 2029–2030 anyway. Track 2 is the CR-1 path, not a special delay. Rushing him in on K-1 or E-2 is what costs that number early. He stays in Muscat, visits Canada on eTA under the §3D budget (≤120 days/year, no dwelling), does not settle in Port Hope. Wendi’s citizenship application (~Jan 2028) sits inside the I-130 wait if she stays. Children A/B can then be Canadian by descent. LAWFUL PLANNING if the visits are real visits.

How Track 2 dies by accident. Days in Port Hope are Canadian days (CRA factual residence / common-law), not US substantial-presence days. A winter in Port Hope at $2M is the Ontario trap. US SPT (IRC §7701(b)) is a separate log for ESTA days on US soil: 31 days this year and a weighted 183-day lookback. 90 US days/year for three years = 135 — clear. 120 US days = 180 — close. Keep two logs. If I-130 is pending, serial US ESTAs are dual-intent optics (§4.4); Canada visits to see Wendi are a different question, still capped at 120 days. Muscat lease real. Day count on paper.

Track 3 — Sell, then move with capital

At 2.5–3×, $2M net prices around $5–6M before commission [E]. At this size, ad-network concentration and a one-person key-man usually compress the multiple; treat $4–6M as the planning band and get a CBV, not a Flippa screenshot. Sold while still a non-resident, generally not US-taxable. Arrives with capital, no CFC, no 5471. Failure hedge if the relationship ends after the move. No earn-out (earn-out becomes post-arrival ordinary income). Empire Flippers-class commission ~15% is ~$0.6–0.9M on that band.

Track 4 — Keep the company, retain inside a US C-corp

Today 100% is paid out, so deferral is worth nothing. At $2M they could live on part and retain the rest. US C-corp: 21% on what stays in. Schedule C and NCTI both tax the full profit whether distributed or not. Retention only helps if they actually stop emptying the box.

Track 5 — EB-5 as a marriage-independent green card

If the relationship dies, CR-1 dies. At this income EB-5 is payable from months of profit or a slice of a sale: $800,000 TEA / $1,050,000 standard for petitions filed through 31 Dec 2026; CPI-U for filings on or after 1 Jan 2027. [S41] Direct EB-5 of the app company fails the 10 US W-2-job test. Use a regional-center project (indirect jobs) plus source-of-funds from AdMob/Meta/IAP. Hedge, not a substitute for a bona fide marriage if they are actually marrying. Do not copy commercial “file before 30 Sep 2026 to lock the amount” — USCIS ties the amount to the 1 Jan 2027 CPI date; 30 Sep 2027 is the Regional Center Program authorisation.

Track 6 — Ontario together (Plan B geography)

Stay in Port Hope if Clayton’s yes is “don’t take him far.” Boris on IEC/visitor. Do not do this at $2M for tax reasons — Ontario effective rates at this band sit around 52–53% (~$1.04–1.06M) [E]. This track is for William’s current town, not for tax.

Track 7 — E-2 bridge (Slovak or Omani nationality)

Temporary. At $2M he can capitalise a real US company and clear the marginal-enterprise problem. Useful only after the relocation gate is actually open, as a bridge to CR-1, not as “forever.”

Track 8 — Long-distance until the visa (2029–2030)

No relocation fight until the order. Boris visits on the §3D budget. Keeps Oman tax. This is Track 2. UM at 8 on non-stops is a visit tool for 2027–2029, not the reason they live in Buffalo after landing.

The two tracks that dominate at $2M with a predicted Clayton yes: Track 2/8 (Oman-resident until CR-1 lands 2029–2030, Wendi’s citizenship in the wait if she stays) is the default. Track 1 is the same landing date unless they burn money on K-1/E-2 to put him on US soil early — that is the ~$0.73–0.85M/year question. Track 3 (sell) sits behind both as the failure hedge. I-864 at this income is a domicile-and-paperwork problem, not a poverty-line problem. Relocation consent through counsel, then domicile, then admission.

If the real weights are “with Wendi, two biological children, William still sees Clayton, keep as much as possible for A and B,” the one-roof Buffalo household is the wrong shape. See §14C.

14C. More ways — with Wendi, two more children, William sees Clayton, capital stays for A and B

Stated goal in this section: Boris is with Wendi; they have two biological children; William keeps a real life with Clayton; Boris does not become William’s financial father; as much as possible of the ~$2M/year compounds for A and B.

The honest constraint. There is no lawful way to share a roof with William for years, hold out as his other dad, and then deny a step-parent support claim. Canada: if Boris “stands in the place of a parent,” he cannot unilaterally withdraw; FCSG s. 5 then sets an amount having regard to the Guidelines and Clayton’s duty — not automatically the full table. Chartier v. Chartier, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 242. [S12] New York: generally no post-divorce step-parent support without adoption; during marriage, Family Court Act §415 can reach a step-parent only if the child is on public assistance, which this household will not be. [S48] A prenup cannot bargain away a child’s claim. Do not adopt. Do not change William’s surname. Do not put Boris on the school file as “father.”

Where the money actually goes. William’s extra room, food, and weekend petrol in a Buffalo house is on the order of tens of thousands a year [E]. US tax on $2M is ~$0.73M (Florida) to ~$0.85M (Buffalo) a year. Eleven years of that, until William is 18 (~2037), is on the order of $8–9M that never reaches A and B. Optimising William’s backpack and ignoring the IRS is the wrong end of the telescope. The lawful levers, in order: (1) do not become a US or Canadian tax resident until you mean it; (2) do not make William’s home Boris’s home; (3) ring-fence the company for A and B before there is a marital household.

Ring-fence — runs on every track below

• Do not adopt William. Do not hold out. Clayton stays the table debtor in the Ontario order. Wendi, as mother, houses William when he is with her. That is her parental duty, paid from Clayton’s support and her own earnings, not from the Oman company.
• Marriage contract / prenup under the law of the first marital home, independent counsel, full disclosure, well before the wedding: company, pre-marital capital, and future app income are separate. It will not stop Chartier or I-864. It will stop a New York equitable-distribution fight over the apps.
• Irrevocable trusts for A and B only, funded while Boris is still a non-resident, before cohabitation. 529s, life insurance, will residue — A and B. William is Clayton’s child; he is not a remainder beneficiary because Boris was in the building. Structure [Q] US international counsel (NRA grantor-trust rules if he stays Oman-resident).
• Sell or check-the-box before any US start date if he ever lands. Earn-outs become ordinary income. No kitchen-table ECI.
• unavailable — not discussed: nominees, “roommate” in the same house, hiding income from a support court, paying Wendi in cash so it never hits a household budget.

Track 9 — Two homes. William never moves. No relocation case.

William’s habitual residence stays Port Hope. Clayton’s access is the current one — better, not worse. There is no s. 16.9 notice, no Hague risk, no NY school enrolment. Boris does not live in William’s house, so Chartier facts stay thin.

The adults have a second home the other side of the Peace Bridge (Lewiston / Grand Island / Niagara Falls NY) or, cheaper on tax, a Florida pied-à-terre. Wendi’s school-year nights stay in Port Hope with William. When she visits Boris, those nights William is with Clayton. That is extra parenting time for Clayton, which is often the thing he will actually say yes to. Children A and B: Wendi delivers in the US (she is a citizen — Kentucky family or the NY pied-à-terre). They are US citizens at birth. They can travel with her to see Boris. They do not need William to relocate for that to work.

LAWFUL PLANNING if William’s home is really Port Hope (school, paediatrician, friends, majority of nights) and the US place is the adults’ place. If Wendi and William start spending school weeks in Buffalo, it is a relocation dressed up as commuting — you are back in §3B, and you have donated Chartier facts.

Money: if Boris lives in the US place, the $0.73–0.85M tax bill is still there. If he visits the US place and remains Oman-resident (Track 10), the tax bill is not. The two-home geometry is what keeps William’s costs on Clayton + Wendi.

Cost to “being with Wendi”: they are not in the same house on school nights. That is the price of not relocating William and not standing in Clayton’s place.

Track 10 — Visiting marriage. Boris never becomes a US person.

Marry after the Ontario divorce (clean paternity for A and B). Do not file I-130. He keeps Oman tax residence, visits on Canada eTA / US ESTA under the §3D budget, no dwelling of his own in Port Hope. Wendi stays in Port Hope with William. Children A and B are born in the US when she chooses (Kentucky or a short US stay) so they have jus soli; Slovak by descent if paternity is on the birth record; Canadian if she is already a citizen at the birth.

This is the maximum-capital track: ~$0 US tax, ~$0 Chartier, no I-864, no 5471, company never on a US grid, trusts for A and B funded as an NRA. William sees Clayton as he does today.

What it is not: living together. It is a Gulf-pattern visiting marriage. I-751 never arises because there is no green card. If she later wants one roof, that is a new decision, priced at ~$0.73–0.85M/year plus Chartier, not an automatic next step. LAWFUL PLANNING if the visits are visits. Serial ESTAs as de facto US residence are not.

Track 11 — Have A and B on the visit years. One roof only after William is 12 (or 18).

William is ~8 in 2027, ~12 in 2031, ~18 in 2037. Chartier facts and household spend scale with years under the same roof. US tax does too, if he has landed.

Sequence: marry when free; conceive A and B while still on the visiting pattern (Track 10); Wendi delivers in the US; William’s school and Clayton’s weeks do not change; decide on a shared household when William can fly UM (~8–11) or fly alone (12+), or when he is done high school. A teen’s views also weigh more in any later relocation. The Oman-tax years in between are the contribution to A and B. Do not treat “we’ll move in together next spring” as costless.

Track 12 — Florida (or Texas) pied-à-terre, William still in Port Hope

Same geometry as Track 9, no NY state tax. Federal+SE on $2M still ~36.5% if he is a US resident. Only worth it versus Buffalo if he is going to be a US person anyway and Clayton’s yes is not required because William is not moving. Non-stop UM Port Hope–Florida is a William visit to the adults, not a relocation, if his home remains Ontario. Until he is 8, an adult on every flight — that adult is Wendi or Clayton, not a reason to enrol him in Tampa.

Track 13 — Capital lock for A and B (a layer, not a geography)

Do this on Tracks 9–12, and on Track 2. Independent valuation. Irrevocable trusts for A and B, or a holding vehicle that is not marital property, funded before the wedding. Prenup. Separate accounts. Wendi’s household ledger for William: Clayton’s table amount + her earnings. Boris can gift Wendi (spousal, then her money). He should not be the named payor of William’s school, hockey, or orthodontics — those are s. 7 facts and Chartier facts. Life insurance payable to the A/B trusts. Will: residue to those trusts. QDOT/estate only if he is the non-citizen spouse in a US marital estate — avoid that fact pattern by not becoming a US person (Track 10) or by staying LPR without mixing the company into her name.

Track 14 — Give Clayton more time, on purpose

The relocation fight is about taking William away. The opposite offer is often easier to hear: William stays in Port Hope; some of Wendi’s adult time is in the US with Boris; those nights are Clayton’s. Written as a parenting agreement, not as a destination question. Clayton’s table support continues; his time may rise toward the s. 9 band, which can change the set-off — still his file, still not Boris’s. Wendi has to want that. If she requires William in her house every school night and Boris in that house, you are back to Track 1 and you will pay Chartier + US tax.

How the new tracks score against the stated goal

If those four weights are real, the dominant package is Track 10 now, Track 9 or 11 as the relationship hardens, Track 13 from this month, Track 1 only if Wendi will not accept two homes. Track 14 is how you ask Clayton without asking him to give William up. The one-roof Buffalo plan remains the plan for “we live together every night.” It is not the plan for “as much as possible for my biological children.”

Wendi has to choose. A visiting husband and a child who stays in his town is a different marriage from a Buffalo kitchen table. There is no third design in which Boris shares that table, avoids standing in the place of a parent, and keeps the Oman rate. Pick two. Pushing that third design by concealment is §14D, and it is how you lose the company, the visa, and the children in one file.

14D. Gray area, and the lines that are not a plan

Asked for: even the unlawful and gray ways to be with Wendi, have A and B, leave William with Clayton, and keep the money for the biological children. The gray that actually moves money is characterization — whose house, whose days, whose domicile, whose name on a school file. The unlawful versions are the same facts with a lie on a form. A lie on an ESTA, an I-130, a 1040, an NR, or a Form 13.1 financial statement is not a tax strategy. It is how the $2M stream, the green card, and the A/B trusts get seized or offset in the same proceeding.

This section names the lines so they are not crossed by accident. It is not a playbook for crossing them.

What “gray” actually is

AGGRESSIVE BUT ARGUABLE means the statute has a hook, the facts can be true, and an auditor or officer might still disagree. You win by keeping the facts true and documented. You lose by decorating them.

Looks clever, usually worse

• One roof, “roommate” paperwork. Worst I-751 file, still Chartier if the facts are parental, still US tax if he lives there. The gray you wanted, with none of the benefit.
• William in NY school “just for the year” while the Ontario order says Port Hope. That is an unauthorised relocation plus a story for two bureaucracies. Not gray. See Hague, §13.
• Boris on William’s health plan / 1040 / school emergency card as father, and off the support file. Those documents are how Chartier is proved. Pick one story.
• Florida tax home, family in Buffalo, 180 NY days. NY statutory residence is a trap for this exact pattern. The $120k NY save is not worth a residency assessment plus penalties.
• Leave Boris off A/B’s birth certificates to “keep them off the US grid.” Self-defeating: you wanted those children to be his, Slovak by descent, and funded by him. Paternity is the point.

Unavailable — concealment is not a plan

unavailable The following only “work” by hiding a fact from USCIS, CBP, IRS, CRA, or an Ontario court. They are listed so they are not confused with the gray table. They are not instructions.

• Immigrant intent on a visitor form. ESTA/eTA as a substitute for CR-1. Willful misrepresentation is INA 212(a)(6)(C) — a permanent bar. Marriage to evade immigration law is 8 U.S.C. §1325(c). The relationship is five months old; this is how those prosecutions look.
• A company that is “Vladimir’s” while Boris still builds, ships, and takes the money. Assignment of income, nominee, sham. IRS and CRA both know this fact pattern. A real FMV sale with money that moves and control that moves is Track 3. Anything else is the company’s value sitting in a fraud case instead of in an A/B trust.
• Residence that exists only on paper (Oman, Florida, anywhere). Tax residence follows where he actually is and where his home is. A mailbox is not closer connection.
• Unreported foreign accounts, 5471, FBAR, 3520, 8938. Willful FBAR is a civil penalty up to the greater of $100,000 or 50% of the account, per year, plus criminal exposure. That is how you convert $2M/year into a smaller number owned by the United States.
• Taking William across a border without Clayton’s consent or an order. Hague wrongful removal. Canada and the US are both parties. He comes back, and the Ontario case is over. Oman is not a Hague party, which makes it worse, not better.
• A Form 13.1 / 1040 / I-864 that does not match the other two. Family court, IRS, and USCIS read each other when they want to. Concealing the $2M from Clayton’s variation case, or from I-864, is not a side channel. It is three agencies’ exhibit A.
• Moving value after a support claim is on the horizon so that “the company is in a trust for A and B” when the court looks. Fraudulent conveyance. The trust is then the source of payment, not a shield.

Net of this section: the gray that is worth money is Tracks 9–11 done with true day counts, a true Port Hope home for William, reported gifts, reported trusts, and no holding-out. The unlawful versions of the same ideas are how a $2M-a-year founder funds three governments and a Hague file instead of A and B. There is no secret third rate between Oman ~0% and US ~36–44%. There is only whether he actually lives where he says he lives.

15. Action plan and advisors

Stage 0 — next 30–60 days. All reversible. Spend almost no money yet.

1. Pin the four numbers first: William’s exact birthday; Wendi’s separation date; Clayton’s actual parenting-time calendar (nights in two weeks — the s. 16.93 / CLRA s. 39.4 switch); the company’s last-three-years net profit. Do not ask Clayton about a destination yet.
2. Ontario family lawyer, first meeting: Divorce Act vs CLRA on these facts; the actual split; whether a packaged proposal (funded drives, generous calendar, s. 7 cost-sharing) should go through counsel or mediation. A kitchen-table “Buffalo?” invites a non-removal clause and a parenting-time grab.
3. Bona-fides file (photos, messages, travel, third-party notes) as if I-751 were tomorrow. Cheap while it is true. This is visit evidence, not a cohabitation file.
4. Two more consults, not commitments: US immigration lawyer (CR-1 on a not-yet-final divorce; I-864 domicile-by-admission; do not front-run NY school); cross-border CPA (8832 eligibility of the specific Oman entity).
5. Pull Wendi’s last three 1040s and a Kentucky relative who could joint-sponsor. At $2M the I-864 floor is not the gate; US domicile by admission still is.
6. September visit: Canada eTA; ≤120 days/year in Canada; no dwelling of his own; US ESTA days logged separately. Do not file I-130, 8832, or a sale. Do not conceive Child A. Do not enrol William in a NY school.

Stage 1 — ~March 2027 (12-month checkpoint). First irreversible look.

7. Only if the relationship is still real and Clayton’s answer is not a hard no (or counsel says a contested case is one they can live with losing), file the Ontario divorce as soon as the one-year separation is met. Uncontested ~4–6 months plus 31 days. [Q]
8. Independent business valuation (sale option and covered-expatriate/estate).
9. 8832 answer in writing before assuming any pass-through rate (19–23% at $300k, ~36.5% at $2M). Oman is not on the per se list; still read the documents. If somehow ineligible, re-run NCTI/ECI before committing to keep the company.
10. Florida is a year-3 decision. Buffalo vs “wait for Wendi’s Canadian citizenship then Buffalo” is the only geographic fork at this stage.

Stage 2 — execution. Only after divorce final and Clayton consent or a relocation case counsel will file.

11. Marry. File I-130 (not K-1). I-864 with a joint sponsor pre-lined-up. Wendi’s US domicile evidence (lease, NY licence, school) assembled before admission.
12. Restructure the company (8832 or sale; distribute accumulated profits; migrate payee accounts) before Boris’s residency start date. Do not perform the company’s work from US soil while it is still a foreign corporation.
13. Write the parenting/support order for Buffalo now and a possible later FL/TX move.

Beyond — decision forks

Advisors

• U.S. immigration lawyer (CR-1, domicile, I-751) — U.S.
• U.S. international CPA / tax lawyer (8832, NCTI, 5471, §877A) — U.S.
• Ontario family lawyer (relocation, divorce, support, consent order) — Ontario
• Slovak citizenship/tax counsel (Act 40/1993 §9, health-insurance arrears) — Bratislava
• Omani corporate/tax adviser (licence, visa, bank, PIT 2028) — Muscat
• Chartered Business Valuator if selling to anyone, including Vladimir

16. Planning confidence assessment

These are subjective decision estimates, not actuarial probabilities. Same disclaimer as Plan A §11A. No dataset supports figures of this kind. Treat a “70%” as “materially uncertain, worth spending money to de-risk,” not as a measured USCIS grant rate. Ranges assume honest, complete applications, no criminal or security issue, and no new travel-ban listing of Slovakia or Oman.

Compounded

As written, treating Clayton’s consent as 50% because it is unknown: relationship 55% × divorce 75% × Clayton 50% × I-130 78% × domicile 82% × visa 79% ≈ 11% that Boris is an LPR in Buffalo with William legally there. Planning range 8–20%. That number is dominated by two facts that are not immigration: the five-month relationship and Clayton.

Strengthened — 12 months’ documented visits (not cohabitation), uncontested divorce, Clayton’s written Buffalo consent obtained through counsel, professionally prepared I-130, NY domicile only after the relocation is authorised and before admission, 8832 or sale before admission: relationship 70% × divorce 90% × Clayton 80% × I-130 88% × domicile 93% × visa 85% ≈ 35%. Planning range 25–50% for the family actually living the plan. Central figure ~35%.

If Clayton later puts a Buffalo driving schedule in writing: drop that factor to ~95% and the strengthened total moves to ~40–55%. He has not done that. “Likely yes if the driving schedule is real” stays in the unknown row. If he has said no and holds ≥40% time, treat Plan C as closed. If he has said no and Wendi has the vast majority, a contested path is live but the combined objective is still only ~15–30% — and Wendi may not bring the case. The 51% DOJ baseline is for reported contested applications, not for “we filed I-130 and hoped.”

Marriage used as the immigration basis is not optional here, unlike Plan A. It does not add 20 points. It is the route. Filing it at month five subtracts 20–40 points for bona fides and I-751 later.

The two fragile gates

Almost everything else is either routine or can be made near-deterministic through timing and documentation. The genuine risk concentrates in Clayton / the relocation order and whether the relationship is real at month 12. USCIS is not the hard part of Plan C. Plan B’s hard part was a CRS score. Plan A’s was §22 and §43. Plan C’s is a seven-year-old’s father, and a five-month relationship.

Four pre-move tests

The plan becomes reasonably investable only once all four are passed. Together they move the full objective from roughly 8–20% to 25–50%.

1. Clayton, through counsel. A packaged Buffalo driving schedule, not a kitchen-table destination question. A no, early, is the highest-value piece of information in the file.
2. Divorce timeline. Separation date on paper; uncontested petition when the year is met. Stacked, this is what puts landing in 2029–2030. The 300-day clock cannot start until finality.
3. CPA memorandum on the Oman entity. Eligible for 8832 or not; ECI if worked from Buffalo; 5471 vs Schedule C. Before any election and before any sale.
4. Immigration counsel on bona fides and domicile-by-admission. A five-month I-130 is how these cases get RFEs. A 12-month visit file plus a marriage-era joint life is the repair. Do not buy a NY lease to manufacture cohabitation.

17. What could not be verified

• Confirm the live State Department treaty-country table before any E-2 spend. v1 wrongly said Oman was absent; Oman E-2 has been in force since 11 June 1960. Recheck the week of filing — lists move. [S31]
• egov.uscis.gov processing times (Cloudflare). I-130 ranges above are secondary.
• 9 FAM 302.9-4 (90-day/preconceived intent) — page not fetched. Position in §4.3 is statutory plus common practice.
• Muscat immigrant-visa jurisdiction for an Oman-resident Slovak.
• Oman free-zone entity type (LLC vs SAOC etc.). The per se list does not include Oman; the documents are still unread.
• Whether Boris’s work from U.S. soil would, on these exact facts, give the company a USTB — fact-specific under §§864 and 882; the risk is high enough to structure around, not to litigate.
• SSA totalization HTML (access denied). Indexed lists include Slovakia and do not include Oman.
• Form 8938 2026 dollar thresholds.
• County-level 2026 ACA childbirth OOP; rents; school districts. Family silver premiums for Erie/Niagara are sourced at [S47]; OOP is still [Q].
• Clayton’s actual consent, the parenting-time split, William’s birthday, Wendi’s separation date, the company’s profit.
• U.S. child-passport DS-3053 practice (travel.state.gov blocked).
• Whether Act 40/1993 §9 marriage exception covers INA 319 naturalisation (as opposed to citizenship that vests by marriage).
• August 2026 birthright follow-on order, full text. Immaterial for Wendi’s U.S.-born children.
• Gold Card I-140G / actual LPR grants.
• Live visa-bulletin EB-2 rest-of-world wait.
• Whether enhanced public-charge cables target Gulf residence history for Slovaks. Not seen.

18. The single most important unknown, and the cheapest action

Unknown: Clayton’s actual parenting-time calendar (nights in two weeks), and his answer to a Buffalo driving schedule in writing. That pair sets the s. 16.93 burden and whether Plan C exists. Whether the $2M is net or revenue sizes every tax and sale number. The constitutive documents confirm 8832; they are unlikely to forbid it, and they are still unread.

Cheapest action: write William’s birthday, the separation date, and the nights-in-two-weeks calendar on a piece of paper. Book the Ontario family lawyer. Do not ask Clayton about Buffalo until that lawyer has a packaged proposal to put through counsel or mediation. A kitchen-table question is how you donate the s. 16.93 burden. A cheap early counselled no is still worth more than a $5,000 immigration consult.

Sources

[S1] USCIS, Bringing Spouses to Live in the United States as Permanent Residents; I-751. https://www.uscis.gov/family/bring-spouse-to-live-in-US

[S2] USCIS, Visas for Fiancé(e)s of U.S. Citizens; G-1055 (05/29/26). https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-of-us-citizens/visas-for-fiancees-of-us-citizens

[S3] USCIS, I-864P (effective beginning 1 March 2026), 48 contiguous states. https://www.uscis.gov/i-864p

[S4] DHS, Visa Waiver Program; INA 245 immediate-relative exception to the VWP adjustment bar. https://www.dhs.gov/visa-waiver-program

[S5] 8 U.S.C. §1325(c); 8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(6)(C)(i)

[S6] USCIS, E-2 Treaty Investors; EO 14351 (Gold Card). https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/e-2-treaty-investors

[S7] Divorce Act s. 16.9; Notice of Relocation Regulations, SOR/2020-249

[S8] Divorce Act ss. 16.1, 16.91–16.93, 16.95

[S9] IRCC, Documents to submit when applying for a child’s passport (proof of parentage as of 5 Nov 2024)

[S10] Ontario, Child and spousal support when one person lives outside of Ontario; ACF/OCSE International

[S11] Air Canada, Children Travelling Alone / Unaccompanied Minor; Domestic Tariff CTA(A) No. 3, Rule 50. https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/home/plan/special-assistance/unaccompanied-minor.html

[S12] Chartier v. Chartier, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 242; Divorce Act s. 2(2); Federal Child Support Guidelines s. 5

[S13] I-864P as [S3]

[S14] IRS, United States income tax treaties — A to Z (Oman absent; Slovak Republic present)

[S15] 26 U.S.C. §§951A, 250 as amended by P.L. 119-21; 26 U.S.C. §962; Oman Tax Authority PIT / RD 56/2025

[S16] Instructions for Form 3520 (Rev. Dec. 2025); 26 U.S.C. §§6038, 6039F; FinCEN FBAR

[S17] Rev. Proc. 2025-32 §§4.37–4.38; 26 U.S.C. §§877, 877A

[S18] 26 U.S.C. §§267, 7872, 1401, 1411; CRA T4032-ON 2026

[S19] IRPA s. 28

[S20] Citizenship Act s. 5; IRCC, Change to citizenship rules in 2025 (Bill C-3)

[S21] Divorce Act ss. 12, 16.9, 16.91

[S22] Slovak Family Act (36/2005) §85; UPA (2017) §204; SCOTUSblog on Trump v. Barbara (June 2026) and the August 2026 order

[S23] CRA, Dispositions of property for emigrants; T4114 Canada Child Benefit; Ontario, Apply for OHIP

[S24] 26 U.S.C. §2056; Tax Foundation, State Individual Income Tax Rates and Brackets, 2026; KFF, 2026 ACA Marketplace enrollment, premiums, deductibles

[S25] U.S. Embassy Slovakia, Immigrant Visas — Bratislava routine IV ended May 2024; Frankfurt designated. https://sk.usembassy.gov/immigrant-visas/

[S26] Act 40/1993 §9 as amended 1 April 2022 (AKMV / EUI / MZV Washington summaries of the five-year-residence and marriage exceptions). Confirm on slov-lex before any N-400.

[S27] 8 CFR 213a.1 (domicile); 8 CFR 213a.2(a)(1)(ii) (re-establish by admission)

[S28] January 2026 immigrant-visa pause country list as reported (IRAP / university international-student offices, August 2026). Slovakia and Oman not listed. Re-check State before filing.

[S29] U.S. Consulate General Montreal — immigrant visas for beneficiaries resident in Canada; Montreal IV instruction packet.

[S30] P.L. 119-21 visa integrity fee ($250, inflation-adjusted) on nonimmigrant issuance; ESTA and immigrant visas exempt. Implementation uneven.

[S31] U.S.–Muscat and Oman Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights, signed 20 Dec 1958, ratifications exchanged 11 May 1960, in force 11 June 1960. State Department treaty-country table (archived) lists Oman E-1 and E-2 as of that date; Slovak Republic E-2 1 January 1993 (succession from the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic treaty). Oman reciprocity schedule lists E-2 (6-month validity). Confirm live travel.state.gov the week of any E-2 filing. v1 of this plan wrongly treated Oman as absent.

[S39] 8 U.S.C. §1183a(a)(2)–(3): I-864 enforceable until naturalisation or 40 qualifying quarters (and related termination events). Divorce is not a statutory termination event.

[S40] USCIS, “USCIS Issues Guidance on Making Public Charge Inadmissibility Determination,” 18 Aug 2026; DHS final rule published 20 July 2026, effective 18 Sept 2026, applying to I-485s filed on or after that date. https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-issues-guidance-on-making-public-charge-inadmissibility-determination

[S36] Department of Justice Canada / CRILF, A Study of Post-Separation/Divorce Parental Relocation, analysis of 738 reported English cases 1 Jan 2001–30 Apr 2011. Success 51% (2001–2010 as published); Ontario 107/193 = 55%; joint physical custody (≥40%) 30%; sole custody 64%; new-relationship reason 48% (103/216); international 62% vs 49% within Canada. https://justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/fl-lf/divorce/spsdpr-edpads/p4.html — pre-2021 amendments and pre-Barendregt.

[S37] Divorce Act s. 16.93 (burdens); s. 16.92 (relocation factors, including that the court shall not consider whether the moving parent would go without the child).

[S38] Barendregt v. Grebliunas, 2022 SCC 22; Gordon v. Goertz, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27.

[S32] USCIS Policy Manual vol. 12, Part G, Ch. 3 — INA 319(a) 3-year spouse naturalisation

[S33] G-1055 (05/29/26): N-400 $760 paper / $710 online; I-751 $750 / $700; I-130 $675 / $625; I-485 $1,440 (paper; online $1,390 as reported)

[S34] OBBBA / P.L. 119-21: CTC $2,200; QBI permanent, 2026 MFJ phase-in range $150,000 above a ~$403,500 threshold (practitioner summaries of the 2026 inflation figures)

[S35] SSA, 2026 contribution and benefit base $184,500; CRS / Tax Foundation 2026 brackets and $32,200 MFJ standard deduction

[S41] USCIS, About the EB-5 Visa Classification (last reviewed 18 Nov 2025): petitions filed on or after 15 Mar 2022, $1,050,000 standard / $800,000 TEA (includes infrastructure); CPI-U adjustment every five years, first adjustment for petitions filed on or after 1 Jan 2027; Regional Center Program immigrant visas authorised through 30 Sep 2027; direct projects must create 10 full-time qualifying employees on the NCE payroll, regional centers may count indirect jobs. https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/permanent-workers/employment-based-immigration-fifth-preference-eb-5/about-the-eb-5-visa-classification

[S42] Treas. Reg. §301.7701-2(b)(8): per se foreign corporations by jurisdiction. Oman is not listed. Slovak Republic Akciova Spolocnost is listed. Cornell / eCFR text inspected 22 Aug 2026. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/26/301.7701-2

[S43] USCIS Form I-864 instructions: intending-immigrant spouse’s income may be counted if it will continue from the same lawful source after LPR; assets of a US citizen sponsoring a spouse or child 18+ need only equal 3× the shortfall (5× is the general family rule). https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-864instr.pdf ; USCIS Affidavit of Support page (same 3× exception).

[S44] IRCC, Entry requirements by country — Slovakia is an eTA-required country for air travel to Canada (land/sea: no eTA). https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/visit-canada/entry-requirements-country.html

[S45] 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Canada and the United States are both contracting states; Oman is not. ICARA, 22 U.S.C. §§9001–9011, implements the Convention in the US. Wrongful removal: Convention Art. 3. A taking to Buffalo without consent or an order is a US-Canada Hague case; a taking to Oman is not.

[S46] Children’s Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, ss. 39.1–39.4, as added by the Moving Ontario Family Law Forward Act, 2020, S.O. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15, in force 1 March 2021. Burdens at ss. 39.4(5)–(7) mirror Divorce Act s. 16.93. O. Reg. 155/21 (notice forms).

[S47] NY State of Health, 2026 Lowest Cost Silver Plan by County: Erie and Niagara $581.62 (individual LCSP). Highmark WNY 2026 IFP brochure, family silver ~$2,304.80/month. MoneyGeek 2026, Independent Health WNY family ~$2,959/month. Unsubsidised once MAGI exceeds 400% FPL (~$128,600 family of four, 2026).

[S48] N.Y. Family Court Act §415: spouse or parent of a child under 21 who is a recipient of public assistance may be required to contribute a fair and reasonable sum. Practitioner summaries of NY law: no general post-divorce step-parent support without adoption; the §415-type duty ends when the marriage ends. Confirm with NY family counsel before relying on it. Contrast Divorce Act s. 2(2) / Chartier and FCSG s. 5 in Canada. [S12]

Deep-research run (partial) that this version builds on: session report 22 August 2026. Version 5 live recheck the same day: USCIS I-864P (48-state 125% $27,050 / $34,150 / $41,250 / $48,350, effective 1 Mar 2026); I-864 instructions 3× spouse-asset rule and intending-immigrant spouse income; G-1055 05/29/26; USCIS EB-5 amounts $1,050,000 / $800,000 and 1 Jan 2027 CPI date; Treas. Reg. §301.7701-2(b)(8) (Oman absent); Divorce Act s. 16.93; DOJ Canada relocation study p4; Oman 1958 FCN in force 11 June 1960. NY 6.85% MFJ band through ~$2.155M is from published 2025 NYS DTF schedules / 2026 Tax Foundation compilation — [E] at the $2M row, not a Form IT-201 computation.