Skip to content

Menu

Greenberg Traurig, LLP logo
HomeAboutServicesEventsPublished ArticlesMedia CoverageContact
Search
Close

EB-5 Insights

Where Government Policies and Business Realities Converge

Executive Summary and Clarifications from May 1, 2012 EB-5 Stakeholders Meeting with USCIS

By Kate Kalmykov on July 18, 2012
Posted in EB-5 Program, Econometric Report, Non-Regional Center, Regional Center, USCIS Public Engagement

On May 1, 2012, the USCIS held their quarterly stakeholders meeting at the California Service Center.  Yesterday, the USCIS issued anUSCIS EB-5 May Summaryof that meeting, in which they attempt to address questions that were asked during the meeting but which could not be commented on during that time.  The following is an overview of important clarifications:

  • Although the USCIS adheres to a first in, first our process for adjudicating cases some I-924 filings including regional center designation applications, amendments and requests for project pre-approval are given to adjudicating officers familiar with the regional center applicant if possible.  This presumably explains the inconsistency in processing times between certain I-924 applicants.  USCIS requests that applications for cases that are similar to previous adjudications be identified at the outset to assist them with the assignment of cases.

 

  • Questions related to economic analysis can be posed directly to the USCIS economists on staff through use of the dedicated EB-5 email box.

 

  • Target time for processing I-924 request for evidence (RFE) responses is 30 days.

 

  • USCIS confirms that the welcomed proposed changes contained in the November and January draft memorandum are not considered formal policy guidance at this time.  However, they advised that a third iteration of the draft memorandum will be posted for public comment in the next few weeks.  (The same promise was made back in May at the meeting).

 

  • USCIS confirmed that an immigrant investor who is not associated with a regional center may deploy capital into a portfolio of businesses, so long as all capital is deployed through a single commercial enterprise and all jobs are created within that commercial enterprise.

 

  • Tenant Occupancy- USCIS outlined the following scenarios to illustrate their new policy:

 

  • The tenant business is a new business which did not merely move from another location .  This is not acceptable. None of the EB-5 capital would be flowing to the jobs created by the tenant.

 

  • The tenant business received cash from the development for tenant improvements This is not acceptable. The tenants would still be responsible for creating the jobs. The EB-5 capital would simply be improving/outfitting/customizing the structure already owned by EB-5 capital.

 

  • The tenant business received a loan from the development .  This is acceptable with caveats. This effectively represents the co-mingling of capital. Similar to the quid pro quo expenditure agreement referenced above, however, this will render the agency vulnerable to fraud because the tenants could form an agreement beyond the adjudicative scope of USCIS to funnel the funds back to the developer. In addition, USCIS would need to define the constraints of the loan amounts and duration. Otherwise, the developer could loan $0.01 to a tenant to take credit for any jobs created. Finally, the tenant business must verify that the jobs are new jobs not transferred from elsewhere.

 

  • The tenant received free rent or rent reductions.  This is acceptable with caveats. Similar to (b) above, this effectively represents the co-mingling of capital as the free rent/rent reductions acts as a loan. The same caveats apply here as in (b) above. In addition, this will cause a significant decrease in rental income for the EB-5 NCE, which should be an investment at-risk, not at-loss. USCIS would still need to define the constraints of the rental discount required, which effectively serves as a loan. It is highly unlikely, however, that the free rent or rent reduction over a 2.5-year period would sum to a total amount that could be considered a substantial investment in the tenant business.

 

  • The tenant received an equity investment from the development.  This is acceptable with caveats. Again, this effectively represents the co-mingling of capital as in (b) above. The same caveats apply here.

 

  • USCIS confirmed that bridge financing is acceptable – in the form of either debt or equity.  If the project commences based on the bridge financing prior to the receipt of the EB-5 capital and subsequently replaces it with EB-5 capital, USCIS will give the new commercial enterprise credit for the job creation under the regulations.  This guidance will be formalized in a forthcoming USCIS policy memorandum.

 

 

Tags: bridge financing, bridge loan, eb-5 executive summary, Tenant Occupancy, USCIS
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Kate Kalmykov Kate Kalmykov

Kate Kalmykov Co-Chairs the Immigration & Compliance Practice. She focuses her practice on business immigration and compliance. She represents clients in a wide-range of employment based immigrant and non-immigrant visa matters including students, trainees, professionals, managers and executives, artists and entertainers, treaty investors

…

Kate Kalmykov Co-Chairs the Immigration & Compliance Practice. She focuses her practice on business immigration and compliance. She represents clients in a wide-range of employment based immigrant and non-immigrant visa matters including students, trainees, professionals, managers and executives, artists and entertainers, treaty investors and traders, persons of extraordinary ability and immigrant investors.

Kate has deep experience working on EB-5 immigrant investor matters. She regularly works with developers across a variety of industries, as well as private equity funds on developing new projects that qualify for EB-5 investments. This includes creation of new Regional Centers, having projects adopted by existing Regional Centers or through pooled individual EB-5 petitions. For existing Regional Centers, Kate regularly helps to prepare amendment filings, file exemplar petitions, address removal of conditions issues and ensure that they develop an internal program for ongoing compliance with applicable immigration regulations and guidance. She also counsels foreign nationals on obtaining greencards through either individual or Regional Center EB-5 investments, as well as issues related to I-829 Removal of Conditions.

Kate also works with various human resources departments on I-9 employment verification matters as well as H-1B and LCA compliance. She regularly counsels employers on due diligence issues including internal audits and reviews, as well as minimization of exposure and liabilities in government investigations.

Read more about Kate Kalmykov
Show more Show less
Related Posts
Third Quarter Updates from USCIS on EB-5 Program
August 3, 2012
USCIS Announces Engagement with EB-5 Economists
June 8, 2012
USCIS on Tenant Occupancy...How Times Have Changed Since 2009
March 12, 2012

Stay Connected

Follow GT on Twitter Join the Discussion on Facebook Subscribe to this blog via RSS View GT's LinkedIn Profile
Subscribe

March 29 | EB-5 Financing Happy Hour in NYC

Topics

Blog Authors Show/Hide

  • Shaoul Aslan‡
  • Charles F. Bass˘
  • Kristen Burke
  • Dillon Colucci
  • Patty Elmas˘
  • Naomi Feinstein
  • Dale Rose Goldstein
  • Elaine C. Greenberg
  • Lawrence H. Heller
  • Jennifer Hermansky
  • Cole F. Heyer
  • Graham Iversen
  • Kate Kalmykov
  • Greenberg Traurig, LLP
  • Luna Ma
  • Ian Macdonald
  • William Mack
  • Sarah M. Mathews
  • Anna H. Morzy
  • Courtney B. Noce
  • Seongbae Park‡
  • Bracha Pollack
  • Linnea C. Porter
  • Diana Prak˘
  • Laura Foote Reiff‡
  • Greenberg Traurig, LLP
  • Bruce C. Rosetto
  • Donna L. Rudnicki‡
  • Nataliya Rymer
  • Rebecca B. Schechter ‡
  • Martha Schoonover‡
  • Gillian Sproul
  • John K. Wells

Archives

Recent Posts

  • GT Team Travels and Educates Across Asia
  • EB-5 Financing Accounts for Over $780,000,000 in Past 6 Months
  • You Are Invited | EB-5 Financing Happy Hour in NYC – March 29
  • USCIS Removes Biometrics Requirement for Form I-526E Petitioners
  • EB-5 Integrity Fee: Key Question Left Unanswered by USCIS
GT Law Blogs

EB-5 Insights

Greenberg Traurig, LLP logo
Follow GT on Twitter Join the Discussion on Facebook Subscribe to this blog via RSS View GT's LinkedIn Profile E2 Law Blog GT LE Blog Inside Business Immigration Hospitality Law Check-In Immigration Greenberg Traurig Web Site GT Israel Law Blog Consumer Products Counselor Emerging Technology Views Cultural Assets GT London Law Blog Financial Services Observer GT Amsterdam Law Blog Legacy Advisors
Privacy PolicyDisclaimer

About Greenberg Traurig

Greenberg Traurig, LLP has more than 2650 attorneys in 44 locations in the United States, Europe, Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East. The firm is a 2022 BTI “Highly Recommended Law Firm” for superior client service and is consistently among the top firms on the Am Law Global 100 and NLJ 250. Greenberg Traurig is Mansfield Rule 5.0 Certified Plus by The Diversity Lab and is recognized for powering its U.S. offices with 100% renewable energy as certified by the Center for Resource Solutions Green-e® Energy as a member of the U.S. EPA’s Green Partnership Program. The firm is known for its philanthropic giving, innovation, diversity, and pro bono. Web: www.gtlaw.com.

Copyright © 2023, Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo