[
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "LLC / no Canadian equivalent",
    "texas": "A Texas limited liability company: pass-through taxation, flexible contractual governance under the Business Organizations Code.",
    "alberta": "No LLC entity type exists in Canadian law. A private corporation is the functional substitute, but it does not carry pass-through taxation or the LLC's flexible-governance architecture.",
    "note": "Not a naming gap; a structural one. An Alberta corporation and a Texas LLC are not interchangeable planning tools.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.ullaw.ca/resource/what-is-an-llc-in-canada",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "Alberta ULC (unlimited liability corporation)",
    "texas": "No Texas analogue by this name.",
    "alberta": "Despite the name suggesting a US-style limited-liability entity, ULC shareholders bear unlimited joint-and-several liability. It is a Canadian corporation for Canadian tax purposes but a disregarded entity or partnership for US tax purposes, used specifically for US-inbound cross-border tax planning.",
    "note": "False friend. \u201cUnlimited liability\u201d is the entity's defining feature, not a warning label a reader can skip past.",
    "false_friend": true,
    "source": "https://www.bennettjones.com/Insights/Updates/Alberta-Unlimited-Liability-Corporations",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "Member (Texas LLC term)",
    "texas": "The owner of a Texas LLC, per the Business Organizations Code.",
    "alberta": "No equivalent. Since Alberta has no LLC, its corporate law uses \u201cshareholder,\u201d governed by a board of directors, instead.",
    "note": "Downstream of the base LLC gap above.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.ullaw.ca/resource/what-is-an-llc-in-canada",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "Registered agent / agent for service",
    "texas": "A registered agent, maintained continuously, accepts service of process and official notices on the entity's behalf.",
    "alberta": "An agent for service (sometimes styled through the registered office) performs the roughly parallel function under a different institutional framing.",
    "note": "Functionally close; the framing and filing mechanics differ.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.sos.state.tx.us/corp/registeredagents.shtml",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "Certificate of Formation / two-document formation",
    "texas": "One document. The Business Organizations Code collapses formation into a single Certificate of Formation filed with the Secretary of State.",
    "alberta": "Two documents. Articles of Incorporation (the constitutive document) plus a separately issued Certificate of Incorporation (the government's proof of formation).",
    "note": "A Texas-trained reviewer checking an Alberta formation file for \u201cthe certificate\u201d should expect two documents, not one.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.sos.texas.gov/corp/bocfaqs.shtml",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "Texas franchise tax",
    "texas": "A margin-based state privilege tax on doing business in Texas, assessed under 34 Tex. Admin. Code 3.586, separate from federal income tax.",
    "alberta": "No equivalent. Alberta imposes ordinary corporate income tax; it has no separate privilege or franchise-tax layer on top of it.",
    "note": "A cost center that exists on one side of the border only.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/franchise/",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "Professional corporation",
    "texas": "Texas recognizes both professional corporations and, as a separate entity type, Professional Associations (PA), a wrinkle Alberta does not have.",
    "alberta": "Alberta professional corporations require voting shares held exclusively by licensed members of the same profession, under dual oversight: corporate law plus the profession's own regulator.",
    "note": "Same label, materially different regulatory architecture on each side.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://dbblaw.com/faqs-about-professional-corporations-in-alberta-part-1-fundamentals-tax-considerations/",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "Series LLC",
    "texas": "A single Texas LLC can create internally segregated \u201cseries,\u201d each with its own assets and liabilities walled off from the others.",
    "alberta": "No Canadian statute has an analogue to the protected-cell or series concept.",
    "note": "Inferred from the absence of any LLC entity type in Canada; no source on the Canadian side names the absence directly.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://ftb.ca.gov/file/business/types/limited-liability-company/series-limited-liability-company.html",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "Foreign entity / extra-provincial corporation",
    "texas": "A foreign entity transacting business in Texas registers with the Secretary of State, roughly parallel to a US certificate-of-authority regime.",
    "alberta": "An extra-provincial corporation registers through the Alberta Business Registry, filing certified home-jurisdiction Articles plus a Certificate of Incorporation as exhibits.",
    "note": "Same function, different filing exhibits and different institutional path.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://businessalberta.ca/how-to-register-an-extra-provincial-corporation-in-alberta",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "category": "Entity vocabulary",
    "term": "\u201cGood standing\u201d",
    "texas": "Texas issues a Certificate of Fact-Status under that colloquial umbrella; the statute itself does not use the phrase \u201cgood standing.\u201d",
    "alberta": "Alberta issues a Certificate of Status, near-identical in function and in official framing to the Texas certificate, under the same colloquial umbrella.",
    "note": "Neither jurisdiction's statute actually defines \u201cgood standing.\u201d Both certificates answer the same practical question by a different official name.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.sos.state.tx.us/corp/copies.shtml",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "category": "M&A vocabulary",
    "term": "Share Purchase Agreement / Stock Purchase Agreement",
    "texas": "Stock Purchase Agreement is the US default term for the same instrument.",
    "alberta": "Share Purchase Agreement is the Canadian and wider Commonwealth default term.",
    "note": "Same instrument. Vocabulary only; do not read a substantive difference into the label.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/stock_purchase_agreement",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "M&A vocabulary",
    "term": "Material Adverse Change (MAC) / Material Adverse Effect (MAE)",
    "texas": "MAE is the standard US term.",
    "alberta": "MAC is the term more often seen in Canadian drafting.",
    "note": "Commonly assumed to mark a real doctrinal split. It does not. Canadian case law (Fairstone Financial v. Duo Bank; Cineplex v. Cineworld) treats the two as functionally synonymous in current drafting. This entry debunks the assumed difference; it does not assert one.",
    "false_friend": true,
    "source": "https://www.mondaq.com/canada/contracts-and-commercial-law/1271236/managing-risk-in-ma-material-adverse-change-and-material-adverse-effect-clauses",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "M&A vocabulary",
    "term": "RWI (US) / W&I insurance (Canada, Commonwealth)",
    "texas": "Representations and Warranties Insurance (RWI): premiums typically run 2.5 to 3.5 percent, with a \u201cdrop-down\u201d retention feature.",
    "alberta": "Warranty and Indemnity (W&I) insurance: the same product family, but premiums typically run 0.5 to 1.5 percent, with a retention that \u201ctips to nil,\u201d and different default data-room disclosure practice.",
    "note": "Not just a naming difference. The pricing and retention mechanics genuinely diverge, which changes how a cross-border deal team should model the cost of coverage.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.dlapiper.com/en-us/insights/publications/2026/01/wi-rwi-key-differences-cross-border-transactions",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "M&A vocabulary",
    "term": "Exchangeable share",
    "texas": "No US equivalent by this name; a US buyer's deal team should not assume familiarity with the term.",
    "alberta": "A Canadian-specific cross-border tax-structuring device: a CallCo/ExchangeCo structure that lets Canadian sellers defer capital-gains tax on stock consideration paid by a US buyer.",
    "note": "This entry defines the term only. The full tax-structuring mechanics are covered in <a href=\"/cross-border/us-buyer-canadian-target/\">Where a U.S. Buyer's Assumptions Break on a Canadian Target</a>; this lexicon does not re-derive that analysis.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.fasken.com/en/knowledge/2025/03/exchangeable-share-structures-in-cross-border-ma-what-us-buyers-of-a-canadian-target-should-know",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "M&A vocabulary",
    "term": "Disclosure schedule, earnout, escrow agent",
    "texas": "Function identically to their Canadian counterparts on the current research record.",
    "alberta": "Function identically to their Texas/US counterparts on the current research record.",
    "note": "Researched specifically for a divergence and none was found. Listed here as confirmed shared vocabulary rather than omitted, so a reader does not wonder why an obvious term is missing.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Regulatory vocabulary",
    "term": "Secretary of State / registry-agent model",
    "texas": "A direct government office, the Secretary of State, handles corporate filings.",
    "alberta": "Alberta corporate filings run through the Alberta Business Registry using licensed private registry agents, not a direct government office analogous to a US Secretary of State.",
    "note": "A structural difference in who a filer actually transacts with, not just a naming difference.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://registry-alberta.ca/nuans/",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "category": "Regulatory vocabulary",
    "term": "NUANS name search",
    "texas": "No structural equivalent. The Texas Secretary of State performs only an internal name-availability check.",
    "alberta": "A standardized, computerized comparative name and trademark-search report, required pre-incorporation.",
    "note": "Lower-confidence entry. The only source located for the \u201cno US equivalent\u201d claim is a general encyclopedia entry, not a primary or Big Law source; treat this entry as provisional pending a stronger citation.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUANS",
    "confidence": "low"
  },
  {
    "category": "Litigation vocabulary",
    "term": "Business Court / Commercial List",
    "texas": "A freestanding specialized court, created September 1, 2024 by HB 19, with tiered monetary thresholds ($5 million for governance/BOC matters, no threshold for public companies).",
    "alberta": "The Court of King's Bench of Alberta's Commercial List is a specialized docket within the existing trial-level court, not a separate court.",
    "note": "Genuinely different institutional models, not just different names for the same kind of forum.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/texas-business-courts-what-you-need-know",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Litigation vocabulary",
    "term": "Personal jurisdiction / minimum contacts vs. real and substantial connection",
    "texas": "US courts apply the constitutional due-process minimum-contacts analysis.",
    "alberta": "Canadian courts apply the Van Breda real-and-substantial-connection framework: a closed list of presumptive connecting factors, with a rebuttal step.",
    "note": "Genuinely different doctrinal tests, not two names for the same test. Directly relevant to the medium-confidence personal-jurisdiction point carried on <a href=\"/cross-border/alberta-texas-energy-corridor/\">the Alberta-Texas energy corridor page</a>; this entry is the doctrinal contrast behind that hedge.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.osler.com/en/insights/updates/supreme-court-of-canada-splits-on-test-for-assuming-jurisdiction/",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Litigation vocabulary",
    "term": "Discovery / deposition vs. examination for discovery",
    "texas": "Oral pre-trial questioning under oath, governed by the Federal Rules or state procedural rules.",
    "alberta": "Examination for discovery: functionally similar, but provincially governed, tied formally to the pleadings, and time-capped differently by province (for example, a 7-hour limit under BC-derived rules).",
    "note": "Related, not identical. The formal tie to the pleadings and the provincial time caps are the practical traps for a US-trained litigator.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.lexpert.ca/news/legal-faq/answers-before-trial-examinations-for-discovery-in-canada/393767",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Litigation vocabulary",
    "term": "Summary judgment vs. summary judgment and summary trial",
    "texas": "One mechanism: summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 or its state analogue, available only where no genuine factual dispute exists.",
    "alberta": "Two distinct mechanisms. Summary judgment exists, and a second device, summary trial (particularly in BC-derived rules used elsewhere in Canada), permits abbreviated adjudication on the merits with live evidence and cross-examination even where a genuine factual dispute exists.",
    "note": "No single US procedural analogue exists for the second mechanism. A US litigator assuming \u201csummary judgment\u201d covers the whole field will miss it.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.ippractice.ca/2016/02/summary-judgment-and-summary-trial/",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Litigation vocabulary",
    "term": "Forum-selection clause enforceability",
    "texas": "No crisp, sourced Texas-versus-Alberta doctrinal comparison was located.",
    "alberta": "No crisp, sourced Texas-versus-Alberta doctrinal comparison was located.",
    "note": "Unconfirmed. General background sources exist on each side individually, but nothing ties them together into a stated divergence. This entry flags the open question; it does not assert a difference.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2013/05/forum-selection-clauses-limitations-on-enforceability",
    "confidence": "low"
  },
  {
    "category": "Regulator names",
    "term": "AER (Alberta Energy Regulator)",
    "texas": "No single-regulator equivalent; see the RRC/TCEQ split below.",
    "alberta": "A single, integrated regulator established in 2013, covering the full energy asset lifecycle from exploration through reclamation.",
    "note": "Definition only. The substance of the single-window-versus-split comparison is covered in full on <a href=\"/cross-border/alberta-texas-energy-corridor/\">the Alberta-Texas energy corridor page</a>.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.aer.ca/about-aer/history-and-mandate",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Regulator names",
    "term": "RRC (Railroad Commission of Texas)",
    "texas": "Texas's primary oil-and-gas regulator. The name is historical; it no longer regulates railroads and does not adjudicate private lease or royalty contract disputes.",
    "alberta": "No equivalent by this name; see AER above.",
    "note": "A name that misleads a reader unfamiliar with Texas practice.",
    "false_friend": true,
    "source": "https://www.rrc.texas.gov/about-us/faqs/rrc-authority-and-jurisdiction/",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Regulator names",
    "term": "TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality)",
    "texas": "A separate Texas agency handling air, water, and waste environmental permitting, distinct from the RRC.",
    "alberta": "No equivalent; the AER's single-window model absorbs this function.",
    "note": "The RRC/TCEQ split is itself the point of comparison against Alberta's unified AER.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "Tax vocabulary",
    "term": "GST/HST vs. Texas sales and use tax",
    "texas": "State-administered sales and use tax, with no VAT-style input-credit mechanism, and its own economic-nexus thresholds.",
    "alberta": "Federally administered (Canada Revenue Agency) GST/HST: a uniform 5 percent federal base rate plus provincial HST, a uniform CAD $30,000 registration threshold, and input tax credits.",
    "note": "Structurally different tax systems, not just different rates or names.",
    "false_friend": false,
    "source": "https://taxcloud.com/blog/us-vs-canada-sales-tax/",
    "confidence": "medium"
  },
  {
    "category": "Tax vocabulary",
    "term": "S-corporation election / CCPC",
    "texas": "Subchapter S is a US pass-through tax election: the corporation itself is not taxed as a separate entity.",
    "alberta": "The closest Canadian analogue, the Canadian-Controlled Private Corporation (CCPC) regime, is not a pass-through mechanism. It is a preferential corporate tax rate and small-business-deduction regime; the corporation is still taxed as a separate taxpayer.",
    "note": "A genuine false-friend gap. Conflating the two is a real trap for a cross-border planner assuming CCPC status delivers pass-through treatment.",
    "false_friend": true,
    "source": "https://taxpage.com/articles-and-tips/how-to-leverage-the-tax-benefits-of-canadian-controlled-private-corporation-ccpc-structure-for-emerging-high-growth-companies/",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "False friends",
    "term": "Director",
    "texas": "Texas directors' fiduciary duty runs primarily to the corporation, with the derivative-suit and business-judgment-rule framework as the central minority-protection mechanism.",
    "alberta": "Canadian directors owe their fiduciary duty to the corporation itself, not directly to shareholders, a formulation from the Supreme Court's Peoples/BCE line. Canada's primary minority-protection tool is the statutory oppression remedy, not a derivative-suit/BJR framework.",
    "note": "Same title, different duty content and a different primary remedy structure. A Texas-trained lawyer advising on an Alberta board should not assume the Texas fiduciary and remedial architecture transfers.",
    "false_friend": true,
    "source": "https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/news/features/web-exclusive-directors-have-a-fiduciary-duty-to-the-corporation-and-only-to-the-corporation/267485",
    "confidence": "high"
  },
  {
    "category": "False friends",
    "term": "Barrister and Solicitor",
    "texas": "Texas, like the rest of the US, uses a single unified title: attorney.",
    "alberta": "Canadian lawyers (outside Quebec) are formally dual-licensed as barrister and solicitor, and the combined title still appears on credentials and pleadings today.",
    "note": "The historical England-style split between courtroom and office practice is largely nominal in Canada today, not a practice restriction. A Texas reader should not over-read the dual title as implying two separate kinds of practitioner.",
    "false_friend": true,
    "source": "https://jurigo.ca/en/barrister-solicitor-canada/",
    "confidence": "high"
  }
]