Data insights for the future of EB-5

Visa availability is a key issue shaping discussion around EB-5 legislation and future potential.  I have prepared a series of charts with data to help inform the discussion.

First, let’s look at who uses EB-5 visas. EB-5 gets just 7.1% of total employment-based visas, or about 10,000 visas per year. Lawmakers may assume that by making about 10,000 EB-5 visas available, they have incentivized about 10,000 EB-5 investments annually. That’s not the case.  In FY2019, minor children received 41% of EB-5 visas issued, while just 36% of the quota went to EB-5 investor principals. In previous years, spouses and children received an even larger percentage of EB-5 visas. So long as the EB-5 quota must be shared between principals and their families, it can sustainably incentivize fewer than 4,000 investments annually. More investors do not fit within visa availability.

Clarifying that the @10,000 EB-5 visa quota applies to principal applicants would increase EB-5’s potential sustainable economic benefit by almost 300%. It could also reduce the EB-5 backlog by about 64%. I do not know if Congress would do this for EB-5. But certainly, an adjustment to visa allocation would be immensely and broadly beneficial — not least to the economy and job creation.

In the excitement of welcoming EB-5 investment following the economic crisis of 2008, many investors and issuers did not notice the hard limit on sustainable investor numbers created by the EB-5 quota. EB-5 investment – as reflected in I-526 filings – exceeded the sustainable level every year since 2011.

In the glory days of 2014-2017, EB-5 investment was at least three times more popular than it could afford to be under an annual visa quota of about 10,000, with only about 36% going to investors. That popularity was wonderful for the U.S. economy, which got tens of billions of dollars in investment and hundreds of thousands of jobs, but it was not good for immigration. Thanks to the mismatch between EB-5 demand potential and available EB-5 visas since 2011, EB-5 has ended up with a backlog of over 80,000 applicants still awaiting the visa incentive for their economic contributions.

I hear hopes that legislative reform could restore the EB-5 market to what it was a few years ago, such that regional centers could do business at previous levels. Look at the numbers, and think what will need to change to make that possible. EB-5 raised almost $8 billion dollars in 2015 alone, from enough investors to claim at least five years of EB-5 visas. If Congress and issuers want another $8 billion dollars a year from EB-5, they can (1) free up visas for the investors who contributed the first billions (an estimated 80K-100K visas are needed to clear the EB-5 backlog), and also (2) increase the EB-5 visa quota so that it can sustainably accommodate up to 16,000 investors a year (i.e. make the limit 3x to 4x higher than it has been). Or (3) recapture the past blissful ignorance of visa limits and backlog risk.  At least two of those conditions must be met for EB-5 to possibly raise again the kind of investment that it did a few years ago. Otherwise, future expectations must be moderated. As it happens, expectations have generally been moderate for most of the EB-5 ecosystem. In 2016, DHS estimated that the average regional center project had 15 EB-5 investors, while large projects in 2016 were associated with just a few regional centers.

I highlighted per-country I-526 receipt numbers (in the years for which I have per-country data), because per-country limits also affect EB-5 visa allocation and market potential.

Under current law, EB-5 visas get allocated first to the earliest I-526 filing priority dates from each country, up to a country cap limit of about 700 visas per country. Then any leftover visas are available to the oldest priority dates regardless of origin. Country caps plus sharing visas with family means a sustainable level of just 300-400 investments per year from investors born in any one country. EB-5 demand from China vastly exceeded the per-country level several years ago (by 52x in 2015), then fell to almost nothing. EB-5 demand from China was relatively early, thus now at the head of the line for any visas leftover after organically low EB-5 demand from other countries. Here’s how per-country EB-5 visa allocation has happened so far, in practice.

Backlogged Chinese applicants – the oldest applicants and thus at the head of the line for any leftover visas — have gotten as many as over 8,000 EB-5 visas per year (back in FY2015 when EB-5 interest had not diversified), and at least over 4,300 visas per year (in FY2018 and FY2019, even after a demand increase from the rest of the world). Growing demand from Vietnam and India reached the visa stage by 2018/2019 (but not able to get visas beyond the country limit of around 700, since not near the front of the leftover visa line). All other countries combined have absorbed at most about 3,700 EB-5 visas per year so far.

The charts above have important messages for EB-5 issuers thinking about the future, and for past Chinese investors. Both should focus on the blue segment in each column – the numbers representing EB-5 visa demand from all countries below per-country limits. This number reflects market potential for EB-5 outside of backlogged countries, and is also the variable factor determining visa supply for China.

People trying to calculate future market potential may be concerned to see the “Other Countries” row hitting a plateau in I-526 filings and visa numbers since 2017, even in absence of any visa constraint. At the height of EB-5 program popularity and with the $500,000 investment level, the whole world outside China, India, and Vietnam has yielded fewer than 2,000 investors per year, and used fewer than 4,000 annual visas. Going forward, EB-5 issuers hardly want to all compete for only one to two thousand investors a year spread across miscellaneous countries — and that’s a best case assuming affordable investment levels. Issuers may be concerned to see Vietnam and India visa availability already used up for the next 7-8 years, according to Department of State estimates, and over 4,000 visas getting “leftover” every year to old applicants instead of leveraged to incentivize new investment. Thus the idea of setting aside 3,000 visas in categories reserved for new TEA applicants. With set-asides, total EB-5 market potential going forward could be not only <2,000 investors from non-backlogged countries with organically low EB-5 demand, but also another 1,000 or so investors (36% of set-aside visas) from the high-demand countries otherwise discouraged by backlog wait lines.

While the history of relatively low “Other Countries” demand is a concern for program potential, it’s an encouragement for backlogged Chinese applicants. The China visa wait time equation is China demand/leftover supply, so backlogged applicants welcome reductions to the new demand that reduces leftover supply. Wait time expectations for the China backlog will continue to improve if EB-5 demand continues to fall, as it has done since 2018/2019. China estimates will only get worse if EB-5 gets more popular than it’s ever been before in small countries. Or, if new EB-5 usage expands thanks to “TEA set-asides” providing an exclusive path around backlogs for high-demand countries. Consider the example of a past China-born investor who’s #50,000 in the queue for leftover visas. His wait time outlook changes by orders of magnitude depending on whether the 50,000-long queue before him is likely to advance at a rate of over 6,000 average annual visas available to China (the long-term average I predict, considering falling demand), or 50,000/4,000 (if rest-of-world demand stabilizes back at 2017/2018 levels), or 50,000/1,000 (if TEA set-asides divert 3,000 out of the 4,000 or so annual visas otherwise leftover to the backlog).

In light of these calculations, consider the cost/benefit of increasing total EB-5 market potential by about 1,000 investments a year via 3,000 set-aside visas for new TEA investors. Would that TEA incentive be worth the trade-off a 2x to 5x increase to backlogged Chinese investor wait time expectations?  Especially when the market and incentive potential depends on finding welcome in the home of the painful backlog?  And what if backlog relief (queue elimination) were proposed together with TEA set-asides (queue-jumping)? Such a combo proposal must logically presuppose that either the backlog relief provisions will fail, or the TEA incentive will be null. There’s no attraction to bypassing a painless queue.

I’ll close with a chart summarizing the current state of the EB-5 backlog (with and without derivatives), and with a slide that I made earlier this year for an AILA conference. The backlog chart reiterates how much good would result if Congress clarified that the @10,000 EB-5 visa quota applies specifically to EB-5 investors (principal applicants). The slide reflects an insight that came to me as I struggled to think through realistic EB-5 wait time predictions. “If EB-5 visa wait times are untenable, then something must give to reduce them. If not supply relief, will be demand failure.” If only legislative change can put us on the path of positive relief, and a sustainable and productive future. If that’s not possible today, let’s at least do what it takes to get reauthorization and protection for past regional center investment as soon as possible, to protect the possibility for future relief,

(For links to data sources referenced in this article, see my Timing Data Room page. For those who prefer to interact with charts in Excel, here you go. If the effort and resources that I put into these articles is worth something to you, please consider my PayPal contribution link.)

About Suzanne (www.lucidtext.com)
Suzanne Lazicki is a business plan writer, EB-5 expert, and founder of Lucid Professional Writing. Contact me at suzanne@lucidtext.com (626) 660-4030.

94 Responses to Data insights for the future of EB-5

  1. Desi_in_the_queue says:

    Suzanne is right, something must change, and I won’t be surprised to see three major changes:

    a) USCIS denying pending regional center category I526 petitions as the regional center pilot program itself has expired,
    b) a lot of investors withdrawing their petitions to reclaim their invested amounts by claiming that their regional center committed securities fraud by failing to clearly explain the risk of the regional center program expiring, and
    c) Potential investors reading this blog and deciding to not choose EB5 visas in order to avoid years of unnecessary stress and aggravation.

    • veedster says:

      As Suzanne has pointed out before USCIS is excellent at holding petitions in abeyance. So ‘waiting on Godot” for denials is a point of hilarity.

      1. Reauthorization happens and potentially a grandfather clause protecting all 1-526 filed before June 30. ( this probably will include Behring’s lot.)

      2. Many investors, despite their moaning and whining, will still stick it out except the odd one, knowing that they will never be able to file again with $500k.(unless fraud is committed by operators)

      3> Many who read this will become more informed investors and will not fall for Monet’s painted by amateur operators, promoters, and lawyers.

  2. Desi_in_the_queue says:

    https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/574534-senate-parliamentarian-rules-out-democrats-immigration-plan-b
    The Senate Parliamentarian isn’t being very helpful, and Manchin and Sinema refuse to get rid of the filibuster.

  3. Peter says:

    Thank you Suzanne. Interesting inside datas.

    So, now that we have learned about the potential possibilities of the EB-5 and that only in the year 2015 the industry (ecosystem) could collect more than 8 billion dollar, how it helps us?

    Can help us the bill S.2828 within few hours before Sep 30 so that USCIS can work from Oct 1 on pending application or why AAED has mentioned this bill?

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/2828/all-info?r=1&s=1

    1) How much hope we need still to have and to spread to the investors?

    2) Where is the current drafted new reform bill of EB-5? Is there any reason to hide it?

    3) Why are all this the potential possibilities not used outside of the CR or inside of the CR?

    Finally any bill such those can be held for vote in a ahort time, within minutes:

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/democrats-vote-covid-tests-illegal-immigrants-entering-u-s/

    How much power has the EB-5 industry to hold the reform bill back and not to use all the potential possibilities?

    Where is the potential draft of EB-5 reform bill? Does it contains the next “hope” for more visas?

  4. Peter says:

    Good to hope.

    Hope my post is not again deleted. I want to say more.

    • waitingi485 says:

      Peter, You do have a voice for investors. Valid points and a definite pitch for urgency on this matter.
      My friend, start emailing to “USCIS.ImmigrantInvestorProgram (at the rate) uscis.dhs.gov”
      I am starting it too. And request all brethren to flood USCIS Immigrant Investor mailboxes with your anger.
      That’s just one way to start without pouring it all out on Suzanne’s Blog.

      Suzanne and EB5 Lucid has been a blessing in these times. Look at the data mining she does for us poor souls.
      Imagine if Suzanne stops writing these blogs, where will we see each other 🙂

      • Thanks for the nice words to me, but please do not start flooding the USCIS immigrant investor mailbox with your anger! It will do exactly zero good for the customer service reps to read vented frustration, and it will just distract and slow their ability to give timely response to the inquiries they can deal with.

        • waitingi485 says:

          If there is a USCIS adjudication error, can that be sent to USCIS customer service reps?
          In this fiasco of program expiration and reauthorization, USCIS is bound to make mistakes and one of the occurred with me.
          I hope reaching out to them for such correction is not read as vented frustration.

          • Reaching out for correction is reasonable. I can’t guarantee it will help, but this is indeed the customer service reps’ job, and a reason that the email address exists. In past stakeholder meetings, IPO leadership has frequently responded to reports of adjudication error by encouraging people to send the details to the customer service email for attention and response.

  5. CR says:

    EB-5 visa wait times are indeed untenable and demand failure seems to be the fate of the program. It was already taking place and will only aggravate after the lapse. The bottom line is that program’s credibility among the investors community has gone down the drain and no investor today would recommend EB-5 to its worst enemy.
    The great barons of the EB-5 industry knew they were selling something they couldn’t deliver upon. They were just too busy making money and had no time to do a simple analysis as you just did, Suzanne. They sat on their butts, enjoying ever-increasing sales without worrying about the integrity of the program.
    The good news, if there is any in this nightmare called EB-5, is that you can clearly notice that the industry barons have begun to feel the pressure regarding the recent mobilization of investors, via social networks, AIIA, etc. It is necessary to remain mobilized to prevent the regional centers from continuing to sell projects.
    Indirect investors have a moral responsibility to prevent others from losing their livelihoods pursuing this never-ending immigration path.

    • veedster says:

      Many investors DO NOT DO their own DD. They rely on friends who did it, friends of friends who done it, crooked sweet-talking operators, promoters, and lawyers.

      • CR says:

        In hindsight, vision is 20/20. In 2014, who would have anticipated that the Immigrant Investor Program Office would significantly reduce their productivity despite increases in fees and staff? Who could have anticipated that industry barons would not do their work in Congress?
        Who could have anticipated that the United States of America would not offer legal certainty?
        Back then, due diligence used to be solely focused on regional center capabilities and track record of approvals and return of principal.

      • Roberto Virga says:

        Nice victim-blaming!
        I DID DO my own due diligence, subject to the constraints under which I was operating. And these constraints were: I wanted to immigrate to the US, and not the UK, Portugal, or the UAE.
        So I chose an extremely trustworthy RC, who used my money to finance the construction of a 66-floor skyscraper in Hudson Yards, NYC, as it promised to. And who — I have absolute confidence in this — will return my money at the end of 2023, when the project loan will reach maturity.
        What I did not anticipate — and couldn’t, under the aforementioned constraints — was that the US government would act fraudulently.

        • Peter says:

          Roberto, lets wait for until tonight.

          If not, there facts will be spread 🙂 Just to make sure that we get our green cards and also to make sure that all I-829 are adjudicated to get the money back. In my case the contract states: “when the last investor has been removed the conditional status/received the permanent greencard, then we start to liquidate the fund within 2 years”. We dont need 20 years.

          We have a lot of education to communicate. It doesnt end with only the EB-5 reauthorization.

          The price tag is high for the barons not to act now.

        • Sue says:

          I agree with you. We investors did do DD for ourselves. We choice RC and projects carefully and that’s all we could do. We couldn’t predict the future changes in EB-5 legislation when we invested.

        • Zoe Ma says:

          Your DD was so poor that I doubt if you ever read the offering documents including LP agreement. Every EB-5 offering document, LP agreement in particular, provides that the EB-5 investment is nothing but equity interest in LP and limited member has no right for redemption of investment in 5 years. There is absolutely no return of any portion of investment to limited members unless the GP purchase the interests of limited members personally or LP is dissolved and all limited members receive return of capital.

  6. Dennis says:

    I have read about S. 2828. Does it apply retroactivly for EB5 investor program investors? So that USCIS can continue to work on pending applications?

  7. CR says:

    “Anecdotally, there is some evidence that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service is actually continuing to process the applications that were filed under the Regional Center Program even though the program has sunset. But there is no public commitment to that effect.” 🤔

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/andyjsemotiuk/2021/09/30/foreign-investor-immigrants-ponder-next-moves-regarding-eb-5-regional-center-program/

  8. Peter says:

    Wow. All has stopped but not the processing times for I-526:

    Last months: over 40
    Today, the month is not even over, we have 37 months

    Amazing how they want to … us.

    https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/

    Its a miracle. We need really to take screenshots.

    • You don’t need to take screenshots. I have been logging the USCIS processing time report updates monthly for many years — available here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/dfa4ifgop1vhm63/IPO%20Times%20Dates.xlsx?dl=0
      And before making conclusions from the processing times report, take time to understand the stated methodology. The results are inevitably strange due to an awkward statistical method (used across many USCIS forms, and not an IPO-specific method). Once you understand how the report numbers get calculated, you can see that the report is not and should not be interpreted as a statement from USCIS about normal or expected processing.

  9. Peter says:

    Good know, in case somebody didnt read this:

    https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2021-200

    Washington D.C., Sept. 28, 2021 —
    The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that it filed an emergency action and obtained an asset freeze, among other relief, against Richard Xia (aka Yi Xia) and his company, Fleet New York Metropolitan Regional Center LLC (formerly known as Federal New York Metropolitan Regional Center LLC), for committing securities fraud in connection with two real estate projects in Queens, New York.

    The SEC’s complaint alleges that from 2010 through late 2017, Xia, through Fleet, fraudulently raised more than $229 million through five EB-5 offerings from more than 450 investors….

  10. Daniel says:

    Suzanne, why you are deleting comments? 😞 I thought you were on the side of us ( the investors).
    Why censorship? We invested to live in the “land of the free” not in communist China.

    We need our own website. 😞

    • I do not delete comments (except duplicates), though I’m sometimes tempted! (WordPress will sometimes automatically delete or hold comments if they include many hyperlinks, or other spam flags.) I do occasionally edit language that hurts my eyes, such as acronyms.

  11. Bumble Bee says:

    Once 18 months (or 24 months per the latest USCIS guidance) have passed since the I-829 receipt date, what proof of employment eligibility and authorized stay do I have?

    I understand I can get a visa stamp from a USCIS field office before I travel overseas. I’m not talking about re-entering the country. I’m talking about my ability to keep working at a job that I love.

    • CR says:

      @Bumble Bee
      You need to call USCIS and say the magic word (infopass) to schedule the appointment for the stamp (I-551 extension). You will then have to wait for USCIS to call you back in up to 30 days and pray that they do not call you while you are in the bathroom, taking a shower or is on a no-miss type of appointment. The reason is they will only call you twice, and if you do not answer, you need to start the process over again.
      Please note that 30 days from expiry is the earliest you can call for an appointment.
      With the stamp, you will be able to travel abroad and keep your dream job.

  12. Peter says:

    Published 1 hour ago:

    https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/386396

    I hope Mr Shai Zamanian is right:

    It is anticipated that the program may be reintroduced as part of the Omnibus spending bill by September 30, 2021. Once the program is reauthorized, prospective investors will have a short window to file under the $500,000 rules.

    • Roberto Virga says:

      Peter, please try to take what I’m about to say as constructive criticism (as it is intended, I assure you), rather than as a personal attack.
      Your English is quite poor, and this negatively affects your comments in two ways. The first is that it makes them very difficult to understand. I’m not a stickler for proper grammar, as I myself make grammatical mistakes. But when, like sometimes in your case, the mistakes are so many that they make what you’re trying to say incomprehensible, that’s a problem. The second way it affects your contributions here is that often you misunderstand what you read. That’s what happened here. The article states:
      “It is anticipated that the program MAY [emphasis mine] be reintroduced as part of the Omnibus spending bill by September 30, 2021.”
      Now, to you the statements “today it may rain” and “today it will rain” probably mean the same thing, but to a native English speaker they do not. One states a possibility, while the other makes a prediction.
      Anyway, yesterday the Continuing Resolution bill passed. It first was approved by the Senate, then subsequently by the House, and finally was signed into law by the President. And, as expected, it did not contain a re-authorization of the EB-5 RC program.
      Nothing will happen before Dec 3rd, so you may want to take a vacation from commenting on this blog. For sure, I know I will.

      • Daniel says:

        @Roberto

        To say ”Quite poor” is a total exaggeration. I found Peter’s comment as a message of Hope rather than a prediction.

        And please do not send anybody to ”vacations” because of 2 simple things:

        1. as an investor we do not take orders from a comment.

        2. Maybe Peter lives in permanent vacations like me. Do you have to work everyday Roberto?

        So please do not be mean with fellow investors and relax. Remember this is not an English course, it is Suzanne’s blog were she allows us to express our views and for now it is a place were she allow us to release our EB5 anxiety.

        @Peter: Thank you for the hope you gave me yesterday!

      • Peter says:

        Dear Roberto,

        “may”, “must-pass” and “hope”.

        Did we pay for excuses? I hope you dont run your own business on that. It never ends well 🙂

        Maybe I am taking a break – ohh I forgot: I am on holidays since years and you? But it doesnt stop me to expose this ecosystem and to “educate” investors now. I am sure everybody understands me well. Better than any published statistic.

        For now I am suggesting to you: Dont loose the hope and find your way how to support other investors. Dont be selfish and help us to expose the reality. 🙂

      • Veedster says:

        What part of Peter’s post didn’t you understand?

        Oh! I have been on vacation for 20 years. 9-5 is for someone else.

  13. Frightening says:

    This need a deep thought =Based on calculations from a report published by the IIUSA, the suspension of the program can lead to over 486,900 U.S. jobs lost through the possibility of current investors withdrawing from the program=.

    Money is already released from Escrow & deployed in JCE further even if current investors withdraw from the program, their capital will be only return as per PPM that they have signed.
    The wait time is still not brought to attention of the new applicants. Especially the number of applicants that have subscribed from Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) region in the last week of June 2021 is frightening.

  14. CR says:

    Happy New Year, fellow investors!

    By now, you may have realized that the reauthorization did not take place last night and that our hopes are now set for December.

    Yesterday, early in the evening, CMB sent its investors a bulletin confirming that the Continuing Resolution would not include the reauthorization of the EB-5, in a failed attempt to preempt the bad news as if all stakeholders didn’t know by then.

    In addition to bad timing, CMB marketers have called the continued lapse of the EB-5 Regional Center program “disappointing.” Investors call it a tragedy.

    To add insult to injury, the very same bulletin markets their current projects and efforts to prospect new investors: “Complete Your EB-5 Due Diligence Now”; “Avoid the rush following an EB-5 reauthorization and secure your place in line now” and “CMB is happy to be traveling once again. Director of Investor Relations and Senior Investor Relations Manager, traveled to Peru and Mexico to meet with prospective clients”. I wonder how insensitive do you have to be to do this?

    Folks, make no mistake, they have different interests than ours.

    Grandfathering should be our bet and it is not dependent on re-authorization. Re-authorization seems completely out of reach considering the current political environment and to be honest, it would only deepen the chaos we are experiencing. I do not wish sleepless nights, high pressure and anxiety crisis for new investors. Nor do I think the great barons of the industry deserve to be rewarded for their greed. They should remain unable to sell new projects until they deliver on their promises.

    Grandfathering is the name of the game, folks! Write to your respective regional centers demanding their support for it and please get behind AIIA so they can lobby for grandfathering. If you can’t or doesn’t want to donate money, donate your talents. I hope you have realized by now who is truly at your side in this nightmare.

  15. veedster says:

    CMB guy is a total weasel. I read his letter you posted before. . I almost puked.

    You are absolutely right. Grandfathering is the right thing to do.

  16. veedster says:

    Well, well, well… the Infrastructure bill didn’t pass. We still have time to tag along.

  17. Dan says:

    As an EB5 investor I couldn’t recommend it to others. The US needs to fix the following to make this program competitive with other nations:
    • reasonably match visa supply with demand
    • stop all the uncertainty. CR’s, changing rules, govt shutdowns etc etc as others have mentioned the current state of the program is real banana republic stuff.
    • have proper accountability and fit for purpose tracking at USCIS.

    The US tax implications on their own are enough of a turn off for many. The system seems stifled by arrogance that everyone wants to come to the US and that’s not the case now. The US is a wonderful country, with wonderful people and there could be a great uptick in demand of the program wasn’t administered so shambolically.

    • VK says:

      I have really found this blog very useful over the years and I can relate to the frustration that everyone is experiencing.
      Are the regional centers financially contributing and backing up the efforts of AIIA? If not, should we write to our individual centers and push them to get behind this idea of grandfathering?

      If the situation isn’t resolved this year, can the investors get relief in court and push the idea of grandfathering? If I-526 is approved and you have had investments greater than 2 years with adequate job creation, could we get reprieve and get money back while the green card is getting processed. The intended goal of the program was to have two years of investment at risk with job creation but realistically that duration is a lot longer. Is this something that could be argued in a court of law?

      Finally a practical question, should we continue to redeploy funds in the interim while the outcome of the EB-5 reauthorization is pending? I think the answer to this question is yes, if we want to get benefit from grandfathering. What safety measures to get money back or better interest return could be negotiated if we were to redeploy?

      • CO says:

        @VK

        Answer to most of your questions can be answered if we see it under the light of corporate greed and entitlement of undeserving people in leadership roles. Be it EB5 industry, academic medicine, healthcare, corporate America or political life.

        Look at the newsletters coming out from big RCs and RC organizations. Just a customary mention of reauthorization. No concerns, even for the customary sake to talk about the plight of existing investors, their families, their lives being destroyed and dreams being shattered.

        EB5 industry and its factions have shown to an extent what is very true of United States. No matter what you do for this country or its society, sacrificing everything you have, YOU really don’t matter. What matters are your capital, your skills and hard work to generate more capital and profits for them.

        “Even if you donate your both kidneys to save their lives, they will still complain that your kidneys were not rosy enough”

        • VK says:

          @CO

          I understand that the interests of industry and existing investors align only to a certain degree. Their goals are geared towards reducing investment amount and reducing regulation/continuing rules that protect them instead of the investor.

          But coming back to my question, short of landing up on dialysis after donating both kidneys what can we go to help ourselves. Legal recourse? Continue redeployment of funds? Push these large RCs to get behind existing investors? I doubt anyone would be investing at this point in time with all this uncertainty despite the misleading letters from RCs to recruit new investors.

          • CO says:

            @VK

            I am at complete loss as to what to do next or can we even do anything. After more than 7 years of wage theft, visa slavery, discrimination and disparities despite being a pioneer clinician, I didn’t realize back in 2018 that EB5 will turn out to be the worst disaster of my life. I though that my current job is the worst decision, didn’t know that i could do even worse with EB5.

            I am sorry, I don’t have solutions. EB5 has been the last nail in the coffin for me.

          • Desi_in_the_queue says:

            @vk and @co,

            Just out of curiosity, did you really think that the RCs are going to seriously pursue grandfathering, when they didn’t even negotiate in good faith to reauthorise the RC program for over 6 years?

            The lawyers and “due diligence experts” took their commissions and fees, right?
            I won’t be surprised if some investor’s lawyer were to ask these “due diligence experts” to refund their fees by claiming that they were part of an ongoing conspiracy to commit fraud if these “experts” didn’t clearly disclose the material risk that the program is subject to risk of expiry.

            I won’t be surprised if some investor’s diligent lawyer were to sue the RC executives for treble damages under RICO, by claiming an ongoing conspiracy to defraud investors if the RC owners and executives didn’t clearly state the dangers of program expiry, and it’s possible that there are some very interesting cases on Westlaw about RICO, wire fraud, conspiracy, and securities fraud making for a potent combination that carries stiff mandatory minimum sentences.

            It’s even possible that a diligent lawyer may even come across a bunch of legal precedents to pierce the corporate veil, and may even conduct forensic audits to see exactly how much was paid in commissions to each of these lawyers, DD experts, etc. for green-lighting businesses that already had significant conflict of interest baked in from the very onset, and it’s possible that those conflicts of interest weren’t disclosed clearly to investors.

            Then again, what do I know? I’m sure that the lawyers over here can probably say more. I’m just someone who had the good fortune to read a few good books here and there.

            The above is simply the opinion of someone who loves reading, and is not intended to be construed as legal advice. The foregoing hypothetical scenarios are just my personal opinions and thoughts.

  18. veedster says:

    Before signing up when I did, a couple of years ago, I did serious due diligence, interviewing lawyers, operators, reading their PPMs from top to bottom, investigating builders and their track record of completing projects, etc, which took months of Sundays. And I found the right combination of them for which I am grateful and thank God for that. Don’t ask who, I am not promoting anyone.

    The frustrations emanating from the blog participants are reaching new highs while the cavalier attitude of some of the RC operators is reaching new lows. While we are waiting for a resolution for petitions, all they care about is to rake it in, by promoting for more investors to pump in so their gravy train can continue, with callous disregard for the program continuance, blaming it on politicians. They sure will gloat while choking on Christmas dinner. What this blog has done is priceless in that, exposing all these greedy bastards. NO ONE SHOULD sign in with ANY operator, or lawyer for ANYTHING, until such time this current situation is resolved. Period.

  19. C says:

    The barons of the indirect EB-5 industry are trying to calm us down selling that the program will be reauthorized. Nevertheless, by now, investors do know they can not guarantee such thing given the political environment in Congress and their track record of trying to come together and failing miserably (covet all lose all). Remember they brought us here in the first place! It is just a manipulative movement so we can stop mobilizing ourselves. Please continue to spread the truth around indirect EB-5 as to avoid more people to fall into this trap. It is our moral obligation.

    We should also stop talking about reauthorization. This plays into the baron’s game. All indirect investors should care about is grandfathering. If you still don’t understand it by now, please read yesterday’s AIIA newsletter.

    It is quite clear that their priority is different than ours. They are focused on reauthorization and lower investment thresholds so they can invite more fools to the party fully knowing that it would take more than a decade to reach permanent green card status. Investors should only care about FIFPA (grandfathering).

    Support AIIA in anyway you can!

    • CO says:

      @C@veedster@Desi_in_the_queue

      Every word of your all here should be considered the most golden words of wisdom. They don’t care about reauthorization, its suits their redeployment strategies if the lapse continues. However most of them in reality oppose grandfathering, as it lets them have less control. There is definitely a bigger nexus. Some good people but predominantly new age “Plantation Farm Owners”.

      If the investors commit to do away with the capital and give it to RCs, reauthorization and grandfathering will happen tomorrow. They don’t care about investors, just their capital. They just want to find out every possible excuse or manipulation to hold on to it, if possible for ever.

      • C says:

        @CO,
        Without reauthorization, the source dries up and the barons are prevented from attracting new fools into the trap. Hence, they do want reauthorization but at the same time they know they benefit from a program with low levels of integrity and an inefficient Immigrant Investor Program Office. That is the perfect combination for them so, they can keep our capital forever.
        It is indeed perverse.

        • CO says:

          @C

          I think they know the future. They know that the program can’t be fixed. Major markets have decades of backlog and large part of deceit is out in open now. Even the current investors are now trying their level best to save others from this hideous and heinous trap. Just few hours back, I dissuaded two people to not even think of EB5 RC, keep looking for other options. (Total – 19 over last 4 months).

          Just like in the illegal human organ trade (supposedly exists), the value of a slave is only for the organs, not a living slave. So at this point, for EB5 RC, current investors (living slave) doesn’t matter. Only their capital (organs of the slave).

          Knowing what I know now, I will tell you that EB5 RC doesn’t deserve reauthorization. America is a capitalist, exploitative economy but still not that bad to deserve the kind of corporations EB5 industry has. That’s why the legislative should just grandfather, the existing investors. The corrupt factions of EB5 industry will not let integrity be brought in the EB5 industry modus operandi.

          • C says:

            @CO
            In the absence of integrity measures, for both the industry and investor program office, I also believe (and hope) that the program must not be reauthorized. Regional Center barons don’t deserve better. Enough is enough.
            Current investors should only support grandfathering.
            In the meantime, as you’ve been doing, we all need to keep discouraging new investors from considering EB-5 indirect as a real possibility for immigration.

  20. Peter says:

    Now that we are learning to understand the ecosytem and that may be the reform bill be an amendment of DHS bill:
    https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4431

    And that an entrepreneur heart is beating very fast for the bright future. I would like to know:

    @Suzanne
    Why did you write: „…December 3, or else to see another CR in December to defer the deadline into early Spring…“ ?

    I am expecting already March to September 2022, maybe 2023. But I am sure it continues. Nobody is Santa Claus since we have a bright future.

    • C says:

      Amazing… Any resemblance to the band playing as the Titanic sank is merely coincidental.

      On Titanic, the band leader remained on the ship and continued playing because of his moral character. The regional centers continue to play but for despicable reasons while the industry barons stay in the harbor. Their business is to attract more fools to the Titanic.

      Like the chicken and the pig fable, in a bacon and eggs dish for breakfast, investors are the pigs… they are fully committed… regional centers are the chickens, they are just involved.

      Make no mistake! Any baron from the indirect EB-5 ecosystem who doesn’t come out in public to support grandfathering, with money and/or concrete actions, doesn’t deserve the respect of someone who’s already been on the ship for years. It’s that simple!

      • Peter says:

        Senator Schumer came out for Angelina Jolie 😂 Someone was more important.

        So where are our pictures of success, maybe nothing has ever happened 🤫?

    • CO says:

      Totally a sales pitch, no concern at all about the current investors and no discussion about the issues plaguing the RC industry at all. JUST GIVE ME YOUR MONEY and GET LOST.

  21. veedster says:

    See the article by Peter above., about CMB capital and the owner.

    Someone who has been charged by the SEC for securities fraud, should not be in the business of peddling securities unless that ‘person” weasels his way back in because he just couldn’t stay away from the trough.

  22. nin says:

    Hi Suzanne, wish the politicians taking decisions had half the vision you do. We are from India and got approval in April 2021 for a case filed in 2018 when our dependent child was 20.5 years old (6 months pending to 21st birthday). Do we have until April + 6 pending months = October to do consular processing or do we have 1 year for consular processing (“seek to acquire”)?

    Also with the RC program currently suspended, what are the best options for us to keep our child’s age locked in to ensure PR for dependent child whenever that comes?

    • These would be good questions for the lawyer, With the extraordinary circumstances of COVID-19 closures/backlogs and RC program lapse being obviously totally out of your control, it seems like there should be extra flexibility in the “seek to acquire” requirement. But your lawyer can give the best advice.

  23. hariomshelly says:

    Hi Suzanne
    As u know we all investors r not in the good state of mind. As we applied in December 2018 from india for eb 5 invested in regional centre. But like things r not working in the right direction, and spoils all our plans that make us worried for kids. So my eldest daughter is going to complete her higher secondary education in march2022. So being an applicant of eb5 can we also seek f1 visa for my daughter to study in US?

    • US says:

      My neighbour here in singapore got her F1 vis with an approved I 526. And she was the primary/ sole applicant.

    • RPG says:

      @hariomshelly, my case is similar and my daughter is in the US on an F-1 visa. I applied in Nov’18, got i-526 approved in Mar’21 and my case is at NVC with all my application papers considered complete and clear. Meantime, my daughter wen to the US in Jan’21 after getting her F-1 visa in Oct’20. Hope this helps

    • RPG says:

      What’s the latest on reauthorisation / grandfathering? What do people like EB5Sir and others say? @Peter? @veedster? Others?

      • Peter says:

        Quote: …I haven’t enabled comments for this post, because I’ve noticed my blog discussion tending in an unconstructive direction…

        Its a kind of censorship not to enable comments. By this way are less negativ comments about EB5.

        Before there were also no significant developments. We have been always on a “prediction stage”. Doesnt matter. Some people are looking for an update, I believe that the current new videos from Jeff are news and it should be shared. But i understand also to control any negativ comments on the web. My critic is positiv because your blog became famous. We have been always on a “prediction stage” since months. Isnt it? Some people are looking for an update, I believe that the current new videos from Jeff are news. But i understand also to control any negativ comments on the web. My critic is positiv because finally your blog became famous and it shouldnt be limited. Maybe we just misunderstand your blog. Sorry.

  24. RPG says:

    What’s the latest on reauthorisation / grandfathering? What do people like EB5Sir and others say? @Peter? @veedster? Anyone else?

  25. RPG says:

    What’s the latest on reauthorisation / grandfathering? What do people like EB5Sir and others say? @Peter? @veedster? Others?

  26. Peter says:

    Sorry for not answering. As you know we are somehow censored here. It seems to be the blog was made to spread “hope” until 9/30. Thats why we dont have any news here. Perfectly controlled.

    Anyway watch this: https://vimeo.com/633122753

    As I have predicted before, nothing is happening until December 3rd. Now its suddenly on any Omnibus in December.

    • Ricardo RJ says:

      Thank you, Peter…..

    • RPG says:

      What a pity! Wonder how much further will the can keep getting kicked even beyond December… Would be great if you can keep sharing any news which pops up from different sources…

    • Peter you know I am not censoring your comments. I haven’t updated the blog because I have a full-time job to do, and there haven’t been any significant developments. It’s interesting that you thought I was spreading hope until 9/30. I got heavily criticized for spreading pessimism before 9/30.

      • waitingi485 says:

        Hi Suzanne
        I seriously feel comments should be allowed. There are no hard feelings for this blog or against you. These are just emotions of investors who have no other place to go to.
        I understand that the sentiments reflected towards late 9/30 started getting a bit harsh, but you can make any of us moderators if it is affecting your own personal or professional time.
        Hope we can do something for Lucid writing eventually.

  27. mark says:

    as someone who has read this blog incessantly over the last few years I feel that turning off the comments was a great call. There is little new information and some people are just venting and it serves no purpose. Personaly since the comments were switched off I have felt a bit calmer

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.