Client Advisory: Canada’s Shutdown of Immigrant Investor Program Will Impact U.S. EB-5 Quota

Amin-Wassem-China-US-EB-5

By Wassem M. Amin, Esq., MBA

The Canadian Government announced on February 12, 2014 that it is shutting down the Immigrant Investor Program, effective immediately, with all pending cases being rejected.  As reported in Forbes.com, an estimated 45,000 Chinese Immigrant Investors with applications pending will be affected by this decision.  With the increased popularity of the U.S. EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program in China, it is inevitable that some of those affected applicants will choose to divert their investments here.

Assuming that even a fraction of those 45,000 investors applied through the EB-5 Program, the impact on the EB-5 Quota will be substantial.  U.S. Immigrations Laws allot 10,000 annual visas to EB-5 Immigrant Investors.  The visas are awarded on a first-come, first-serve basis.  As discussed in prior posts, forecasts indicate that this quota will be met as early as June of 2014–effectively backlogging all Chinese Immigrant Investor applicants.

However, it is critical to note that prior forecasts did not account for the potential influx of rejected Chinese Immigrant Investors from Canada.  This poses immediate consequences for EB-5 applicants from China.  An unexpected increase in Chinese applicants will result in the EB-5 quota being met earlier than the deadline previously forecasted, perhaps as early as April of 2014.  That will cause applications processed by USCIS after the deadline to be backlogged, perhaps by a year or more, in addition to current processing times for an I-526 (Immigrant Investor Application).

Potential EB-5 Applicants, particularly those from China, are advised to contact a legal professional to discuss the potential impacts this may have on their applications.

__________________________

Wassem M. Amin, Esq., MBA is an Associate Attorney at Dhar Law LLP in Boston, MA and is the Vice Chairman of the Middle East Division of the American Bar Association.  Wassem has extensive experience in the Middle East, having worked as a consultant in the region for over a decade.  Wassem currently concentrates his practice on Corporate Law, Business Immigration and International Business Transactions.  He has advised countless Eb-5 Investors and assisted developers in structuring USCIS-compliant EB-5 Regional Centers as well as sourcing investors throughout the Middle East.  For more information, please visit the About Us page or request more information on our Contact Us page.

Disclaimer: These materials have been prepared by Wassem M. Amin, Esq. for informational purposes only and are not legal advice.  The material posted on this web site is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship, and readers should not act upon it without seeking professional counsel.

Advertisements

EB-5 Chinese Quota Retrogression: Analysis of Potential Impact and Recommended Solutions

Amin-Wassem-China-US-EB-5By Wassem M. Amin, Esq., MBA

(Visit our Publications Page for a FREE PDF Download of this Article)

Over the past few years, the skyrocketing popularity of the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Visa program has fueled record demand from foreign investors.  The EB-5 Immigrant Visa allows foreign investors and their immediate family members to obtain permanent residency, providing an eventual path for citizenship, in exchange for a $500,000 to $1,000,000 investment in a job-creating enterprise.  The overwhelming majority of EB-5 foreign investors, over 80%, have come from China.  Allotted a maximum quota of 10,000 visas per year, the EB-5 Immigrant Visa is further subject to a numerical per country limit in the event that quota is met.   Known as “retrogression,” this limitation essentially works by creating a backlog in visa availability for immigrant investors from oversubscribed countries.

The U.S. Department of State cautioned in a December 2012 bulletin that projected demand of EB-5 Visas in that fiscal year may subject Chinese immigrant investors to retrogression.  Although that never came to fruition (not due to demand, but primarily caused by slow processing times), the Department of State renewed its caution alert again in December 2013.  Although the 10,000 visa-quota has never been met since the inception of the EB-5 Program, based on new statistics recently released by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (“USCIS”), it is now evident that the demand will surpass the available quota inevitably, perhaps as soon as this Fiscal Year 2015.  This no longer makes the likelihood of Chinese quota retrogression a question of “if,” but rather “when.”

The implications of Chinese quota retrogression are far-reaching and affect not only potential Chinese investors but the entire EB-5 industry, including Regional Centers, project developers, agents, and professional service providers such as attorneys.  This article will begin with a brief overview of the EB-5 program and how visa retrogression works.  It will then assess the potential ramifications of Chinese EB-5 visa retrogression for investors and the EB-5 industry.  Finally, it will propose solutions to alleviate the potential impact of Chinese quota retrogression on project developers and Regional Centers.

Background

In 1990, the U.S. Congress created the employment-based fifth preference (“EB-5”) immigrant visa category for immigrants who invest in and manage U.S. commercial enterprises that benefit the U.S. economy and create jobs. Allotted 10,000 immigrant visas annually, the EB-5 immigrant visa was designed to attract foreign direct investment into projects that would directly impact the economy, i.e., not merely passive investments.

Immigrant investors can apply for an EB-5 visa through two primary routes. The first route is through a direct investment into a qualifying “new commercial enterprise.” The second is through the Regional Center Pilot Program. The Regional Center Pilot Program allows USCIS to designate private or public entities as so-called Regional Centers to function as conduits or administrators of large or medium-scale projects funded, at least in part, by EB-5 investors. Regardless of which route is selected, the EB-5 Investor Visa allows foreign investors to obtain permanent residency in the United States conditioned upon an investment of a minimum of $1,000,000 (or $500,000 in a high unemployment or rural area) in a project which creates and sustains at least 10 full-time jobs for U.S. workers.

How Does Visa Retrogression Work?

Congress sets limits on the number of immigrant visas that can be issued each year. In order to adjust status to that of legal permanent resident, an immigrant visa must be available to the applicant both at the time of filing and at the time of adjudication. Visa retrogression occurs when more people apply for a visa in a particular category or country than there are visas available for that month. Retrogression typically occurs toward the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual category, or per-country limitations.  When an applicant files an immigrant petition, he or she is given a “priority date.”  The priority date is the date when the immigrant petition is properly filed with USCIS.  If, at the time of adjudication, an applicant’s priority date no longer meets the cut-off date published by the Department of State, due to retrogression, his or her case must be held in abeyance until a visa once again becomes available.

The EB-5 Program is allotted 10,000 annual immigrant visas.  However, that number is misleading because the quota counts an investor as well as  his beneficiaries, i.e.,if an average investor is married and has two children, the total number of visas counted towards the quota will be four.  In reality, the average number of actual EB-5 principal investors is around 3,000, substantially lower than the available quota.

Once that annual quota is met, the per country limitations on EB-5 visas will be imposed, creating a waitlist for applicants from oversubscribed countries.  Since Chinese applicants account for the substantial majority of EB-5 visas, they will be the ones directly impacted.  This backlog would essentially delay an investor’s ability to obtain an immigrant visa by a year or more, in addition to normal USCIS processing times for an I-526 (the Immigrant Investor Petition).  Therefore, if, for example, an I-526 petition normally takes 6-9 months, a backlog due to visa retrogression would extend processing times to an average of two years, if not more.

 What is the Likelihood of a Chinese Visa Retrogression?

In FY2013, 8,567 EB-5 visas were issued.  In the first two months of FY2014, over 6,700 EB-5 petitions are already pending with USCIS.  Absent Congressional action, the prospect of EB-5 petitions exceeding the annual 10,000 allotment is inevitable.  Once that quota is met, the per country limits will result in visa retrogression for Chinese investors, delaying their ability to obtain an immigrant visa by at least a year or more, in addition to the time it takes to process the I-526.

Potential Implications

In the long-term, the delay and complications of EB-5 processing will result in Chinese investors looking to other countries that actively compete for foreign investors, including Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom.  Retrogression adds further strains on the EB-5 program which has already been plagued by extraordinarily slow processing times and delays by USCIS.  Faced with the prospect of waiting two or more years before being able to immigrate to the United States, a Chinese investor may decide to immigrate elsewhere.  Other countries will surely capitalize on visa retrogression to draw away potential investors.

In addition, the Chinese retrogression creates a significant conflict of interest between project developers, Chinese investors and immigration agents.  It also raises new ethical issues for an attorney representing the project developer or the Chinese investor.

From an investor’s perspective, an investor with children who are reaching the age of 21 may have incentives to delay the approval of the I-526 as long as possible.  Under the Child Status Protection Act (“CSPA”), commonly known as the “age-out provisions,” a child can immigrate as a beneficiary of a parent’s immigration application until he or she turns 21.  The CSPA freezes the age of children who are derivative beneficiaries of an I-526 petition while the petition is pending, but not once the petition is approved and awaiting the quota to become available for an immigrant visa.  This benefits a Chinese investor whose children are close to aging out.  Thus, it will be their benefit to delay the I-526 approval as long as possible.

From a Regional Center or project developer’s perspective, job creation projections and capital redemption timelines will be directly impacted by retrogression.  Capital redemption, or the investor’s exit strategy, is, essentially, the time period before which the investor can have his capital returned.  A protracted visa immigrant visa availability will tie up the investment money for a longer period of time.  Although that may seem like a benefit to the project developer, most current EB-5 investments provide for an exit strategy in which the developer sells or refinances the business, using the proceeds to repay investors.  A delay in visa availability will delay the developer’s ability to do so–since an investor cannot redeem capital before the approval of an I-829, which is the petition to remove conditions on investor’s permanent resident card.

Another potential implication is whether such a delay would impact the developer’s ability to access investor funds.  In a typical investment through a Regional Center, the investor’s capital is held in an escrow account until the approval of the I-526, at which point the funds are released to the developer.  Previously, an I-526 approval typically meant that the investor would be able to immigrate to the United States (or adjust their status) shortly thereafter because an immigrant visa was always available.  However, visa retrogression will delay that process by a significant period of time.  An investor, therefore, may dictate that the funds be held in escrow until a visa becomes available, not simply until the I-526 is approved.  Without alternate financing, this delay could essentially result in an inability to proceed with a project’s development and, ultimate failure.

From an attorney’s perspective, counsel for a Regional Center must recognize the additional securities disclosures that may result from visa retrogression.  Specifically, new risk factors for offering documents or Private Placement Memoranda would need to be disclosed.  Similarly, counsel for an investor would need to highlight the possible implications to their client.

Solutions and Proposals

Bridge Financing

However, the growth in EB-5 financing market has the creation of spurred specialized loan companies that address this very issue.  There are now several companies that provide specialized EB-5 bridge loans which allow a developer access to all or some of its anticipated capital.

Bridge or interim financing provides the opportunity for EB-5 project developers to take out short term financing to help construct and develop the project, then the EB-5 capital, as it is received, may replace that short term financing yet still receive credit for job creation by USCIS.

Moreover, in its latest Policy Memorandum, USCIS has specifically indicated that such financial arrangements are allowed in the EB-5 context.  In a May 20, 2013 Adjudications Policy Memorandum, USCIS stated, in pertinent part:

It is acceptable for the developer or the principal of the new commercial enterprise, either directly or through a separate job-creating entity, to utilize interim, temporary or bridge financing – in the form of either debt or equity – prior to receipt of EB-5 capital. 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, the new commercial enterprise still gets credit for the job creation [arguably the main requirement of the EB-5 program] under the regulations….Developers should not be precluded from using EB-5 capital as an alternative source to replace temporary financing simply because it was not contemplated prior to obtaining the bridge or temporary financing.

Tapping Alternative Markets

Prudent project developers and Regional Centers should hedge the risk of any impact a shortage in Chinese investors may cause.  Since over 80% of EB-5 investors are from China, even a small decrease in the number of investors may have an significant impact.  Creating an alternative pipeline of EB-5 investors from different regions is the key to ensuring continued and sustained growth in the EB-5 Program.


[1] Wassem M. Amin, Esq., MBA is an Associate Attorney at Dhar Law LLP in Boston, MA and is the Vice Chairman of the Middle East Division of the American Bar Association.  Wassem has extensive experience in the Middle East region, having worked as a consultant in the area for over 9 years.  Wassem currently concentrates his practice on Corporate Law, Business Immigration and International Business Transactions.  He has advised countless Eb-5 Investors and assisted developers in structuring USCIS-compliant EB-5 Regional Centers as well as sourcing investors throughout the Middle East.  For more information, please visit the About Us page or request more information on our Contact Us page.

Disclaimer: These materials have been prepared by Wassem M. Amin, Esq. for informational purposes only and are not legal advice.  The material posted on this web site is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship, and readers should not act upon it without seeking professional counsel.

Doing Business in Saudi Arabia: How to Establish a Foreign Company in the Lucrative Construction Sector


wassem amin saudi arabia

By Wassem M. Amin, Esq., MBA

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of the fastest growing economies in the Middle East.  In 2013, the government increased its budget by more than 20% than the previous year, to approximately 820 Billion Saudi Riyals ($219 Billion).  Additionally, Saudi’s King Abdullah pledged more than $500 billion on social welfare and infrastructure projects over the next few years.  Saudi Arabia’s increased spending is part of its policy to create economic diversification and reform, in turn decreasing their dependence on oil revenue and creating new jobs for the local population.

A large proportion of the Government’s spending, approximately 300 billion Riyals, has been allocated to capital expenditures on investment projects and social infrastructure.  Ambitious plans include building 539 new schools and universities, as well as the development of several new cities in the sprawling desert kingdom.

The biggest beneficiary of this expansionary policy is the construction industry.  Demand in the construction and associated sectors, such as residential and commercial real estate development, will increase exponentially, representing an excellent market opportunity for foreign investors and international corporations seeking to enter the Saudi market.

Applicability of Islamic Finance

Construction projects in Saudi Arabia are typically either public or private.  The governing law which applies to all contracts, including construction, is Shari’a, or Islamic, law.  General principles of Islamic Finance are applicable, such as the duty to act reasonably, in good faith, and to mitigate losses.

In the private sector, within the construction sector specifically, the Islamic Finance principle that applies is the “istisna’a” contract, which is a contract for the sale of an asset that is yet to be constructed or manufactured.  Using this structure, the party providing capital, the financier, enters into a contract with the purchaser of the building to be constructed.  Usually the financier, whether a bank or investor, will then enter into a back-to-back construction contract with a general contractor for the project.   The financier realizes a profit from the spread between the cost of the construction contract and the price of the purchase contract.

Public Works Contracts

However, in the public sector, specific regulations and a complex legal framework govern bidding for public works, as well the interpretation and enforcement of underlying contracts.  While still generally subject to Islamic Law principles, public works contracts are considered administrative contracts and are subject to the Government Bids and Procurement Law, implemented with associated regulations.

Establishing a Foreign Presence in Saudi Arabia

Recent amendments in the law and a shift in policy by the government to attract foreign direct investment have made it easier than ever for a foreign company or investor to establish business operations in Saudi Arabia. Although there are a variety of business organizations in Saudi Arabia, the most commonly used by foreign companies in undertaking construction projects are Limited Liability Companies (LLCs).  That is due to the relative ease of incorporating an LLC (as opposed to, for example, a Joint Stock Company), minimal capitalization requirements, and the requirement of less corporate governance formalities.

The actual procedure of establishing an LLC in Saudi Arabia is typically a two-step process: (1) First, the foreign partner applies to the Saudi Arabian General Investment Authority (SAGIA) for a foreign investment license; (2) Second, once SAGIA issues the license, the partners in the proposed LLC apply to the Ministry of Commerce and Industry in order to incorporate the company.  Once approved, the Ministry will certify the formation documents of the LLC and issue a commercial registration certificate–which permits the LLC to begin operating in the Kingdom legally.

Risks and Opportunities

Although the Kingdom has begun to allow wholly-owned foreign entities to invest in the country, the laws and cultural differences there remain complex and, at times, even frustrating.  In order to effectively operate in Saudi Arabia, foreign investors need to consider a plethora of issues such as: (1) Cultivation of solid business relationship is essential to success; (2) unfamiliar and complex Islamic Finance Laws; (3) risks and incentives in this vast market; and (4) unique cultural and social differences.  Saudi Arabia is a lucrative market for foreign companies and investors.  At a time when the market in the United Arab Emirates is beginning to get stagnant and saturated, Saudi Arabia remains ripe with opportunities.  However, the cultural, political, and legal landscape is complex and varies dramatically from that of countries such as the USA or in Europe.  Unaccustomed foreign companies or investors should seek out advisory or legal firms who are proficient and have expertise in Saudi Arabia.

Dhar Law LLP is uniquely positioned to be able to provide investors with critical insights and advice to support and develop investment and business ventures in the Kingdom.  The Firm’s extensive knowledge is based on decades of first-hand knowledge and experience of the financial, legal, and cultural nuances of the Saudi market.  That, coupled with proven success in the U.S. market, has enabled Dhar Law LLP to provide a wealth of expertise and know-how in sourcing and structuring complex cross-border transactions and investment deals.  Dhar Law’s expert consultants and lawyers, all of whom have a vast legal and consulting background, are able to provide comprehensive solutions that are uniquely tailored to the Middle Eastern market.

Disclaimer: These materials have been prepared by Wassem M. Amin, Esq. for informational purposes only and are not legal advice.  The material posted on this web site is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship, and readers should not act upon it without seeking professional counsel.

Wassem M. Amin, Esq., MBA is an Associate Attorney at Dhar Law LLP in Boston, MA and is the Vice Chairman of the Middle East Committee as well as the Islamic Finance Committee of the American Bar Association’s International Law Section.  Wassem has extensive experience in the Middle East region, having worked as a consultant in the area for over 9 years.  Wassem currently focuses his practice on Business Immigration (EB-5 Regional Center and Investor Representation) and International Business Transactions.  For more information, please visit the About Us page or http://www.dharlawllp.com. 

USCIS Continues Positive Reform of the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program In Policy Memo

imagesBy Wassem Amin, Esq.

On May 30, 2013, USCIS issued the final version of its EB-5 Adjudications Policy.  Although it has been around since 1990, the EB-5 Visa, also known as the Immigrant Investor Visa, has been rising in popularity over the past couple of years.  Summarily speaking, the EB-5 Program is based on three main elements: (1) the immigrant’s investment of capital; (2) in a new commercial enterprise; (3) that creates jobs.

This article summarizes the main changes in USCIS’s adjudications of EB-5 investor and regional center applications.  A complete overview of the EB-5 Visa can be found in previous posts.

  • USCIS explicitly mentioned, for the first time, that administration of the program is done “with the utmost vigilance to program integrity” and that fraudulent applications are referred to appropriate law enforcement and regulatory authorities.  This is perhaps due to the recent high profile fraudulent EB-5 Regional Center in Chicago.
  • Ability to diversify investment:  USCIS clarified that the capital invested may be deployed into a portfolio of wholly-owned businesses, so long as all capital is deployed through a single commercial enterprise.  In other words, an immigrant investor’s capital, whether through a direct investment or regional center, can create a holding company that would receive the funds and distribute them to different businesses – so long as one or more of the portfolio of businesses or projects can create the required number of jobs.
  • Pooled Investments in Non-Regional Center Cases: In a direct investment context, USCIS indicated that the new commercial enterprise can consist of pooled investments OR can have owners who are not applying under the EB-5 program.
  • Geographic Scope of a Regional Center: In adjudicating Regional Center applications, the geographic scope of a Regional Center will be determined on a case-by-case basis.  The Memorandum noted that “the reasonableness of the proposed regional center geographic boundaries may be demonstrated through evidence that the proposed area is contributing significantly to the supply chain, as well as the labor pool, of the proposed projects.”
  • Removal of Conditions on Permanent Resident Status:  USCIS reiterated that the EB-5 Program allows an immigrant investor to become a lawful permanent resident, without conditions, if the immigrant investor has established a new commercial enterprise, substantially met the capital requirements, and can be expected to create within a reasonable time the required number of jobs.  Of particular significance is the fact that all of these requirements need not have been fully realized before the removal of conditions.  It is sufficient that evidence submitted establishes that “it is more likely than not” that the investor is in substantial compliance with the program and job creation will result within a “reasonable time.”  “Reasonable time” is a fact-specific determination, but USCIS indicated that, in most cases, the maximum ceiling allowed will be a one year extension after the original two years.
  • Impact of Regional Center’s change of Plans on Investors: A particularly laudable shift in policy is USCIS’s announcement in the memorandum that it will no longer deny investors’ petitions to remove conditions solely bases on failure to adhere to the plan contained in the Form I-526 (the initial immigrant investor application) OR to pursue business opportunities within an industry category previously approved for the Regional Center.  This will allow Regional Centers significant leeway in pursuing different options if their initial proposed investment fails, which also increases the likelihood of a successful exit for the investor. However, there is a draw back, USCIS noted that:

“it recognizes the fluidity of the business world and therefore allows for material changes to a petitioner’s business plan made after the petitioner has obtained lawful permanent resident status.  However, immigrant investors, and the regional center with whom they associate, should understand that availing themselves of this flexibility does decrease the degree of predictability they will enjoy if they instead adhere to the initial plan that is presented to and approved by USCIS.”

USCIS continues to make positive changes to the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program.  With many practitioners hopeful that the visa quota will be increased if the new immigration bill passes, the EB-5 Program will most likely to continue to gain popularity among foreign investors as well as an attractive capital source for developers stateside.

__________________________________________

Wassem M. Amin, Esq., MBA is an Attorney at Dhar Law, LLP in Boston, MA. Wassem has extensive experience as a business advisor and consultant, domestically and abroad (in the Middle East region), having worked as a consultant for over 9 years. Wassem currently focuses his practice on Corporate Law, Business Immigration Law, and International Business Transactions; where he works with Firm Partners Vilas S. Dhar and Vikas Dhar to advise Regional Centers and individual investors on EB-5 Visa matters. For more information, please visit http://www.dharlawllp.com and email Wassem at wassem@dharlawllp.com.

Disclaimer: These materials have been prepared by Dhar Law, LLP for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. This article is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship, and readers should not act upon it without seeking professional counsel. This material may be considered advertising according to the rules of the Supreme Judicial Court in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Reproduction or distribution without prior consent of the author is prohibited.

How will the JOBS Act Impact EB-5 Regional Centers and Immigrant Investors?

images

By Wassem Amin, Esq., M.B.A.

Although the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Visa has been around for almost 2 decades, it has only started gaining traction over the last few years.  Discussed in detail in previous posts, in summary, the EB-5 Investor Visa allows foreign investors to obtain permanent residency in the United States if they invest a minimum of $1,000,000 (or $500,000 in a high unemployment or rural area).  The permanent residency is conditioned on the success of the investment after two years and, in particular, whether the investment creates a minimum of 10 full-time jobs for American workers.

A United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) Pilot Program allows the creation of so-called “Regional Centers” for the sole purpose of structuring, administering, and marketing typically medium to large scale projects funded through the pooling of EB-5 investments.  After receiving approval from USCIS, a Regional Center could then solicit foreign investors for capital.  The benefit to the foreign investor is, of course, the ability to gain permanent residence in the United States.  Likewise, the benefit to the Regional Center is the low cost of capital in comparison to conventional financing methods.

The increased popularity of Regional Centers has also increased the Securities and Exchange Commission’s scrutiny of how the investments are solicited and marketed.  In a recent joint conference call with USCIS, the SEC made it clear that virtually all Regional Center investment solicitation will trigger regulation under federal securities laws.  Regional Centers are considered “issuers” of securities because they are transacting in investment interests.  Although Regional Centers are usually exempt from registering with the SEC, they are not exempt from regulation by the SEC.

Offerings of securities by Regional Centers are still subject to anti-fraud provisions which prohibit general solicitation and advertising, among other restrictions.  That prohibition is so broad that it includes internet posts, local newspapers, and everything in between.

Changes Under the JOBS Act

On April 5, 2012, the President signed the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (“JOBS”) Act.  The main purpose of the Act is to stimulate the growth of small to medium sized companies through facilitated access to capital and reduced regulatory reporting requirements.  Although not yet implemented, the SEC’s proposed rules under the JOBS Act will positively impact EB-5 investment offerings.  Regional Centers will have significantly more latitude with respect to general solicitations and general advertisements.  In combination with the proposed immigration reform bill, the opportunities for Regional Centers to raise capital will significantly increase.

The Securities Act of 1933 requires that all offerings of securities be registered unless there is an applicable exemption from registration.  Regulation D is an exemption used for small private offerings with, among others, limits the size of the offering and the number of investors.  Title II of the JOBS Act requires the SEC to eliminate its ban on general solicitation and advertising in offerings that are exempt from registration under Rule 506 of Regulation D if all investors are accredited or under Rule 144A so long as all investors are qualified institutional buyers. However, proof of “reasonable steps” must be taken and documented to verify accredited investor status before a Regional Center can claim the exemption.

What Does This Mean to a Regional Center?

EB-5 Issuers such as Regional Centers, will now be able to advertise via website advertisements, newspapers, radio, internet posts, and even email.  However, to take advantage of the relaxed rules, Regional Centers must now take “reasonable steps” to verify that the purchasers are in fact accredited investors.  It will no longer be sufficient for an issuer to rely on a questionnaire to establish whether an investor qualifies as an accredited investor.

The extent of “reasonable steps” a Regional Center will depend on: (i) the type of accredited investor the investor claims to be; (ii) the type of information the Regional Center has about the investor; (iii) the manner in which the investor was solicited; and (iv) the size of the offering and minimum investment amount.  For example, if the EB-5 foreign investors are solicited through a publicly accessible website, a mass email, or a Facebook page, the Regional Center will be obligated to take greater measures to verify accredited investor status.  Conversely, if the minimum amount of investment is high (for example, $1million instead of $500,000), the SEC indicated that it may be reasonable for the issuer (the Regional Center) to take fewer steps to verify accredited investor status.

Catch-22: the Regulation S Exemption

Many Regional Centers also rely on the SEC’s Regulation S to exempt them from registration. However, Regulation S, known as the “offshore exemption”, prohibits any “directed selling efforts” within the United States.  Any general solicitation, particularly using the Internet, may be deemed to be directed selling efforts.  In the case of a Regional Center, this may include information on the offering that is on its website.

Therefore, for example, if the website is accessible to people in the United States, a Regional Center will not be in compliance with Regulation S–even though it might be in compliance with the revised Rule 506 of Regulation D.  In other words, taking advantage of the opportunity to conduct general advertisements and solicitations under the proposed rules of Regulation D may eliminate a Regional Center’s ability to rely on Regulation S.

In the process of developing an operational and marketing plan, a Regional Center must consult with an experienced securities attorney to assist it with navigating the complex federal securities regime.  With the increased popularity of the EB-5 program, the SEC has been significantly stepping up its oversight and scrutiny – even leading to a notorious enforcement action against a Regional Center in Chicago.

Finally, it is important to note that the new Regulation D rules under the JOBS Act have not been enacted by the SEC yet.  Until that happens, the ban on general solicitation and advertisement is still in effect.  _________________________________________________

Wassem M. Amin, Esq., MBA is an Attorney at Dhar Law, LLP in Boston, MA. Wassem has extensive experience as a business advisor and consultant, domestically and abroad (in the Middle East region), having worked as a consultant for over 9 years. Wassem currently focuses his practice on Corporate Law, Business Immigration Law, and International Business Transactions; where he works with Firm Partners Vilas S. Dhar and Vikas Dhar to advise Regional Centers and individual investors on EB-5 Visa matters. For more information, please visit http://www.dharlawllp.com and email Wassem at wassem@dharlawllp.com.

Disclaimer: These materials have been prepared by Dhar Law, LLP for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. This article is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship, and readers should not act upon it without seeking professional counsel. This material may be considered advertising according to the rules of the Supreme Judicial Court in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Reproduction or distribution without prior consent of the author is prohibited.