Developers and Investors Must Keep a Watchful Eye on Proposed EB-5 Changes
EB-5 capital has become a vital source of financing for real estate development projects across South Florida in recent years.
March 21, 2019 at 09:16 AM
5 minute read
EB-5 capital has become a vital source of financing for real estate development projects across South Florida in recent years. However, new proposed regulatory changes to the program and proposed legislation in Congress have caught the eyes of both developers and investors as having the potential to significantly impact EB-5 as a source of financing.
The proposed new regulations could increase the investment threshold needed to obtain the visas for both targeted employment areas (TEA) designated projects and non-TEA projects. Meanwhile, the proposed legislation in the House of Representatives would increase the wait time for investors to receive EB-5 visas and immediately make them unavailable for many investors from across the globe.
Recent Proposed Regulations
Recently, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) sent new regulations related to the EB-5 program to the Office of Management Budget for approval. Currently, the proposed rule would raise the minimum investment amount to qualify for the visa to at least $1.35 million and would curtail locations that could qualify as a targeted employment area. While this is an initial proposal, the rules must still be sent to the General Accounting Office and be subject to administrative approval. As such, it is difficult to predict what the net result of the regulations will be, including what the final increase in the investment amounts for both non-TEA and TEA designated projects will be, and the potential for phasing, if any, of the investment amount increases.
The regulations will also address the priority dates for the I 829 petitions, address the ability of dependents to file I 829s, and the determination of TEA designations. At this time, it is difficult to predict whether the regulations will ultimately be adopted, what the final provisions will contain, and the effective date.
Recent Proposed Legislation
In addition to the proposed USCIS regulation, the U.S. House of Representatives introduced the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019. The proposed act would eliminate the per-country limitation on employment-based immigrants and changes the per-country limitation on family-based immigrants from 7 percent to 15 percent. If passed, the amendments would take effect on Sept. 30, 2019, and apply beginning with the 2020 fiscal year.
The act's transitional rules for employment-based immigrants would be as follows. Beginning in fiscal year 2020, 15-percent of EB-2, EB-3, and EB-5 visas shall be allotted to individuals who are natives of countries other than the two countries with the largest aggregate numbers of natives who are beneficiaries of approved petitions for immigrant status. That number drops to 10 percent for fiscal year 2021 and 2022. Further, the number of visas reserved that are allocated to any single foreign state or dependent area in the appropriate fiscal year may not exceed 25 percent (in the case of a single country) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of visas available.
Additionally, no more than 85 percent of the EB-2, EB-3 and EB-5 visas made available would be allotted to immigrants who are natives of any single foreign country.
Net Result of the Act
Under this act, removing the per-country cap would make the EB-5 visa immediately unavailable for all existing EB-5 investors from the countries that are not currently experiencing the visa retrogression issue—including Brazil, South Korea and the rest of the world (except for China and Vietnam). Hypothetically, in the first five years of the elimination of the per-country cap, it is forecasted by Invest in the USA (IIUSA) that over 96 percent of the annual EB-5 visa allocation would be used by the existing Chinese EB-5 visa applicants and their qualified family members while the remaining 4 percent would be consumed by the existing EB-5 visa applicants and their family derivatives from Vietnam.
Without the per-country cap, all existing EB-5 investors from all countries other than China would face a longer wait to receive conditional permanent residency. Existing EB-5 investors from Vietnam and their family members would need to wait three to five years longer for their EB-5 visas; while existing Indian EB-5 investors and their qualifying family derivatives would face an increase of six years or longer for their EB-5 visa waiting time.
A longer waiting period to receive permanent residency for investors along with the investment amounts required potentially increasing, could severely impact EB-5 as an attractive source of financing for developers. Both developers and investors need to keep a watchful eye on these new regulation and proposed legislation as they move through the approval process.
Ronald R. Fieldstone is a partner in Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr's Miami office. He serves as corporate/securities counsel for multifaceted industries involving EB-5 immigrant visa investor offerings.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLeveraging the Power of Local Chambers of Commerce: A Second-Career Lawyer’s Guide to Building a Thriving Practice
5 minute readCFPB Proposes Rule to Regulate Data Brokers Selling Sensitive Information
5 minute readEssential Labor Shifts: Navigating Noncompetes, Workplace Politics and the AI Revolution
Trending Stories
- 1SDNY Criminal Division Deputy Chief Returns to Debevoise
- 2Brownstein Adds Former Interior Secretary, Offering 'Strategic Counsel' During New Trump Term
- 3Tragedy on I-95: Florida Lawsuit Against Horizon Freight System Could Set New Precedent in Crash Cases
- 4Weil, Loading Up on More Regulatory Talent, Adds SEC Asset Management Co-Chief
- 5Big Banks Did Great Last Year. What Does That Mean for Big Law?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250