Reservations on Reserved Visas: Part 2 – A Simple Congressional Solution Exists

May 18, 2022 | Investor Visas

We previously blogged about the unfair impact that the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 has on the thousands of Chinese and Vietnamese EB-5 investors who are stuck in the visa queue, waiting for their I-526 priority date to become current in the Visa Bulletin. In short: The new legislation reserves 32% of all EB-5 visas made available in each fiscal year to those who invest in rural areas (20%), high unemployment areas (10%), or in infrastructure projects (2%), and absent any action and coordination by USCIS and the State Department, these reservations will only be allocated to future EB-5 investors. As such, the total number of visas available to existing investors will likely be decreased, further extending the wait time for these investors and eligible family members.

Additionally, under the new EB-5 law, unused reserved visas are to “carryover” to immigrants in the same category for the immediately succeeding fiscal year. Any unused “carryover” reserved visas are to be made available to the “unreserved” visa category (existing investors and those who do not qualify for reserved visas under the new legislation) in the next fiscal year. DOS will also need to determine how these provisions interplay with the INA’s requirement that unused visa numbers in a fiscal year fall up from EB-5 to EB-1.

Confused yet?

We are seeking to determine how many EB-5 visas would be available in each reserved category, depending on whether DOS would allot unused reserved visas to the new “unreserved” visa category (existing investors and those who do not qualify for reserved visas under the new legislation).

Notably, with USCIS’ decision to require a Form I-956 approval prior to any new Regional Center I-526 being filed, combined with USCIS’ pathetic processing times on EB-5 cases, it’s possible that few, if any, of these newly reserved visas could actually be used in FY 2022 and FY 2023. A decision by DOS to let the “leftover” reserved visas be allocated to existing investors would be most consistent with the INA’s directive in Section 203(b) to maximize visa number use under the applicable annual limits. On the other hand, if DOS follows the plain language of the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act and ignores Section 203(b) to determine that “leftover” reserved visas be allocated solely to the reserved visa categories in the subsequent fiscal year, the visa number estimates are as follows:

However, we believe that the application of the INA language which encourages the use of numbers under each year’s annual limits would not cause the State Department to intentionally allow numbers to go unused when there is pending demand. In such a situation, the visa number use would be as follows:

This determination will have dramatic impact on DOS’ ability to advance the Final Action Date for existing investors stuck in the visa backlog.

One solution could come from Congress, a five-year technical amendment to the INA to count only principal investors against the annual limit, and not including derivative beneficiaries. Congress has made similar exceptions in the past. In 2005, INA §204(b)(4) was amended to allow the admission of certain special immigrants who qualify as international broadcasters under the EB-4 preference category, and the provision explicitly excluded spouses and children from the numerical limit in the category. Congress also excluded derivative spouses and children from numerical limitations when it authorized the admission of Special Immigrant Translators or Interpreters from Iraq and Afghanistan in 2006.

This correction by Congress would be consistent in the language of the INA that Congress did NOT intend the annual numerical limitation to be diluted by non-investor family members who would otherwise qualify for derivative visas (“Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 7.1 percent of such worldwide level, to qualified immigrants seeking to enter the United States for the purpose of engaging in a new commercial enterprise. . .”).

To hear more about this important topic, register for AILA’s EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act (RIA) Live Online Course.

Related Posts:

7 Things to Know About Converting an E-2 Visa to an EB-5 Green Card

By: Joseph Barnett, Esq., Bernard Wolfsdorf, Esq., and Robert Blanco, Esq. 80 countries have treaties with the U.S. that permit foreign nationals to obtain E-2 Treaty Investor visas, which allow an investor or certain key executives permission to work in the U.S. However, the E-2 visa does not lead to a U.S. green card, and minor children can only stay on their parent’s visas until reaching 21 years old.  So, the question arises: How may an E-2 Treaty Investor convert his/her nonimmigrant visa to an EB-5 investor green card to allow him/her to remain permanently in the U.S., and after 5 years, apply to be a U.S. citizen. Careful planning and having a detailed strategy is essential to ensure that E-2 investors carefully structure their E-2 business in order to possibly convert the visa into an EB-5 green card. Introduction The E-2 Treaty Investor visa grants nonimmigrant status to nationals of a treaty country (not Brazil, Russia, India, or China) who invest a substantial amount of capital in a U.S. business. Qualified Treaty Investors are issued an E-2 visa valid for up to five years, depending on their country of citizenship and reciprocity. Extensions of stay may be granted in increments of up to two years each, as long […]

EB-5 Investor Program — January 2022 Update

Yesterday, the U.S. government filed an “Unopposed Motion for Voluntary Dismissal” in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on their appeal of a June 2021 decision of a lower district court that invalidated the implementation of the November 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule. That rule had raised the minimum investment amount from $1 million to $1.8 million and, from $500,000 to $900,000 for targeted employment areas (TEAs). Reducing the investment amount is welcome news for the EB-5 industry that has been stymied by this regulation. Most importantly, this withdrawal of appeal confirms the minimum investment for investors who create ten jobs in a Targeted Employment Area (TEA) is back to $500,000.  It also confirms that states have the authority to designate areas as a TEA.  This decision has no impact on the reauthorization of the EB-5 Regional Center program. EB-5 investors should know this dismissal does not impact the two biggest issues in EB-5, that is the Regional Center  reauthorization, or whether USCIS will continue to hold pending Regional Center I-526s or I-485s in abeyance until reauthorization. We hope to have some news on these two issues soon, so stay posted. At this time, “direct” EB-5 remains an […]