On September 17, 2026, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) published revised program delivery instructions titled Assessing the genuineness of the offer of employment on a work permit application. The guidance states that operating from a residential address does not, by itself, make an employer or its job offer questionable. Officers are instructed to consider the residential address together with the nature of the business and the broader evidence that the company is actively operating.

The instructions apply the genuineness requirement in subsection 200(5) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR). They cover all employer-specific work permit applications under both the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) and the International Mobility Program (IMP), including renewals. Open work permits are not subject to the genuineness assessment because they are not tied to a specific employer or job offer.

What changed

According to IRCC's program delivery update issued the same day, the revisions:

• Separate the assessment steps for IMP and TFWP applications
• Update contacts for referrals and verifications
• Provide more realistic and relevant example scenarios
• Correct discrepancies between the internal and public versions of the instructions
• Add a procedural fairness process for collecting information directly from employers where no alternative process exists
• Address specific issues such as the handling of extrinsic information

The procedural fairness change is likely to matter most to applicants. Under the revised guidance, an officer with concerns about an offer should send the applicant a procedural fairness letter (PFL) identifying which of the four genuineness factors is in question and why. The letter asks the employer to submit evidence directly to IRCC within 15 days, or within the office's applicable standard. Where an office has no established submission channel, the employer can respond through an IRCC webform, and officers allow an additional 30 days after the deadline for that response to reach the file.

If an officer relies on extrinsic information — material the applicant would not reasonably know about, such as the results of an internet search — the letter must disclose it, and the employer or applicant must have a chance to respond before a finding of non-genuineness is made. Officers are also told to record in the case notes the URL and date of any website they consulted. If the employer does not respond, the officer decides on the information available.

Home-based businesses: the type of business and the overall evidence matter

The revised instructions deal directly with businesses run from residential addresses. Officers are to take the type of business into account: it may be reasonable for a company selling handmade goods or providing digital services to operate from home, whereas restaurants and other larger commercial operations would usually need more space.

IRCC's example is a small meal-delivery company in Toronto, run from the owner's home, that wants to hire a cook. The department says the home-based setup is not the problem in itself. The concern is that the employer cannot show enough evidence of regular business activity — consistent and reliable payment of employees, ongoing purchases of goods and a stable place for the temporary foreign worker to work.

A physical workplace is no longer a requirement

The update also shifts the weight placed on an employer's location. Having a physical business address in Canada is now listed as one example of active engagement in business, and the instructions specifically note that this address may differ from the employee's place of work. The previous version required the employer to have a physical Canadian location where the foreign worker would work; that requirement does not appear in the revised guidance.

The change could be significant for businesses whose staff work remotely, at client sites, across multiple locations or at premises other than the registered address. Employers must nevertheless show that they genuinely operate a business and actively provide goods or services.

The instructions are internal guidance for officers rather than changes to the law itself. Immigration practitioners note that they shape how officers assess files but do not remove an officer's discretion to refuse where the evidence falls short.

What 'actively engaged' means

Every employer-specific work permit must pass four genuineness tests, the first of which is that the employer is actively engaged in the business connected to the offer. IRCC says officers must be satisfied that the organization does more than exist legally — it must be able to show that it actually provides goods or services.

The guidance gives these examples of active engagement:

• Having an operating business
• Actively providing goods or services
• Having a physical address in Canada (which may differ from the employee's work location)

Officers may also review the business's history and start date, type of business, number of employees, gross income and principal activity, and can ask for documents such as business licences, permits and contracts that show ongoing commercial activity. No single factor will necessarily decide the outcome.

The instructions explicitly caution officers against relying too heavily on any one piece of evidence, directing them instead to consider all relevant elements together. That matters most for newer and smaller businesses. A recently established company may not yet have years of tax records, a sizeable workforce or extensive financial statements, and a home-based company may have no commercial lease. None of this automatically means the employer is not genuine, but the employer may need to supply other evidence that it is genuinely doing business.

When officers look more closely

According to the guidance, officers may carry out a more in-depth assessment of active engagement where:

• The business is less than one year old
• Publicly available information raises concerns about the organization
• An internet search suggests the business has closed
• IRCC's records contain negative information about the organization
• Verifications of previous temporary foreign workers resulted in negative findings
• The employer is or was on Canada's list of non-compliant employers

In these cases, officers can request further information from the employer, obtain information from other government departments and use public sources such as Google searches, the Better Business Bureau and provincial or employer websites. Supporting documents may include confirmation of a Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) business number, any required business licences or permits, relevant income and tax documents, contracts and other records showing that the organization is actively doing business. An employer's failure to provide the information requested may lead to a refusal.

New businesses face closer scrutiny, not automatic refusal

A new business can still support an employer-specific work permit application, although it will have less history to demonstrate that it is operating.

In IRCC's meal-delivery example, the company is five months old and employs two other people. It operates from the owner's home and has little online presence. Being so new, it cannot provide T4 slips or a commercial lease, and the owner can show only a few order slips for produce bought the previous week. IRCC stresses that these features do not automatically make the company illegitimate; the problem is the overall lack of evidence of reliable employee payments, regular purchases and stable commercial activity.

By contrast, the guidance cites a well-regarded Toronto restaurant that has been open for six years and employs 36 people, including eight foreign nationals, and now wants to hire a sous-chef. Its years in operation, existing workforce and physical premises where food is served all point toward active engagement.

Taken together, the examples reflect IRCC's broader approach: officers should look at the full circumstances rather than refuse an application because of a single feature such as a residential address.

Shell companies cannot support genuine offers

While making room for home-based and small businesses, IRCC has also sharpened its language on companies set up for immigration purposes. The updated instructions state that a company with no employees that exists in name only and was established for the express purpose of facilitating the entry of foreign nationals does not qualify as an operating business.

In other words, a small business, start-up or home-based company is not suspect simply because of its size or location, but it must be able to demonstrate genuine commercial activity. Registering a company on paper solely to support a foreign worker's entry into Canada will not satisfy the active business requirement.

All four tests must be met

Active engagement is only one part of the assessment. For every employer-specific work permit, officers consider whether:

• The employer is actively engaged in the business (except for offers to live-in caregivers)
• The offer is consistent with the employer's reasonable employment needs
• The employer can reasonably fulfil the terms of the offer
• The employer or its authorized recruiter has complied with federal and provincial or territorial laws regulating employment and recruitment

If an offer fails any one of these tests, IRCC can refuse the work permit application.

On the fourth factor, the guidance notes that provinces such as Manitoba and Alberta require recruiters of foreign workers to be licensed, and an application can be refused if the employer used an unlicensed recruiter.

The starting point also differs between the two programs. Under the IMP, the employer submits the offer directly to IRCC through the Employer Portal, but it is not reviewed until the work permit application is filed. Under the TFWP, the applicant submits the offer with a positive Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA). A positive LMIA generally means Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) found the offer genuine, but IRCC officers must still be satisfied on their own assessment, and if they conclude the offer is not genuine they should first tell the applicant and employer and give them a chance to respond.

The job must make sense for the business

Even when IRCC accepts that a company is genuinely operating, officers must be satisfied that the position fits the employer's type and size of business. The guidance flags situations such as:

• A catering company hiring a roofer
• A company with only 10 employees offering its sixth supervisor position in a year
• A franchise restaurant location hiring a full-time business analyst

Employers may therefore need to explain why they need the foreign worker and how the role fits into their operations.

Employers must be able to deliver on the offer

Officers must also be satisfied that the employer can provide the promised wages, hours, benefits and working conditions — which must meet provincial or territorial standards — for the full duration of the work permit.

Where there are doubts about an employer's ability to pay, officers can request financial documents, including:

• A T4 Summary of Remuneration Paid
• T2 Schedule 100 or 125 for corporations, showing operating income, financial position and retained earnings
• A T2125 or equivalent financial statement for sole proprietorships and partnerships
• A workers' compensation clearance letter

Where services are contracted from a foreign company, officers may also ask for business contracts showing that the organization will have enough future income to meet the terms of the offer.

IRCC's negative example is a new gourmet meal-delivery business that reported a profit of only $10,000 the previous year but plans to pay a foreign worker $45,000 a year. Without further evidence of sufficient funds, an officer may conclude that the business cannot fulfil the offer.

What it means for employers and foreign workers

The revised instructions give officers more detailed criteria for distinguishing legitimate small and home-based businesses from employers that cannot demonstrate genuine commercial activity — a distinction that grows more relevant as remote work and home-based businesses become more common.

A residential business address does not automatically prevent an employer from supporting a foreign worker, and the absence of a traditional workplace does not necessarily mean an offer is not genuine. Employers must still show that they genuinely conduct business, need the employee they want to hire and have the resources to meet the terms of the offer. For IRCC, the central question is not where a business operates, but whether the evidence shows a genuine, active business with a genuine need for the foreign worker.