You are here[HOT] EB-6 visas for venture start-up foreign entrepreneurs?
[HOT] EB-6 visas for venture start-up foreign entrepreneurs?
Recently, the Senate introduced a bill called "Startup Visa Act".
The way this new category would work is as follows. Startup Visa Act of 2010 would create a two year visa (presumably, CPR status) for immigrant entrepreneurs who are able to raise a minimum of $250,000, with $100,000 coming from a qualified U.S. angel or venture investor. After two years, if the immigrant entrepreneur is able to create five or more jobs (not including their children or spouse), attract an additional $1 million in investment, or produce $1 million in revenues, he or she will become a legal resident.
In our opinion, the chance of this bill passing is not that good, and even if it passed, will take long time, but we thought the content of the bill is interesting and problematic. The biggest problem is that it wants to take away IV numbers from the existing EB-5 category, but an interesting point is that they require only 5 full-time jobs versus the 10 full-time jobs required under the EB-5 category.
We like the fact that this category would allow anyone (what does "qualified entrepreneur" mean?) around the world to use his venture business idea as the "investment" to obtain green cards, as long as "qualified" U.S. company or individual raises sufficient amount of funds to try to get a business started and create five jobs. But there is a room for abuse also, because instead of creating jobs, if the business raises additional $1 Million USD in fund, the foreign entrepreneur and family would be able to obtain permanent green cards.
We would also like to note that if they just change the current EB-5 law, there would not be any need for this new category of EB-6 visas. We also think the requirement of 10 full-time jobs for EB-5 is impractical and needs to change to a more manageable 5 full-time jobs.
Startup Visa Act bill posted below in its entirety.
Why require U.S. capital?
I agree with this analysis, as taking away EB-5 IV numbers is a bad idea, especially now that EB-5 is finally starting to get popular. But I'm most surprised about why it's necessary to have $100,000 in startup capital from a U.S. person or entity. Since the program's supposed to be attracting foreign investment in the U.S., why can't (or shouldn't) all of the money be coming into the U.S. from overseas? And I don't imagine that staff at California Service Center want to be burdened with determining who is and is not a "qualified" VC or angel investor. Sounds too subjective.
I don't know if EB-6 Program is supposed to be about attracting foreign investment in the United States, although its primary goal is definitely about creating jobs in the U.S. for American workers. It seems to me that foreign entrepreneurs under the proposed Start Up Visas Act is about using a good business idea that can attract capital and create jobs for American workers.
I do agree, however, that it should not matter whether the capital is from U.S. angel investors or venture capitalists. After all, who cares who puts up the money? If my grandma wants to support Young Noh the foreign entrepreneur because he has a good business idea to start a website called www.eb-5center.com and he gets Samsung company to agree to invest its capital of $1 Million USD and then create 5 full-time jobs for American workers, then that should satisfy all requirements for EB-6 program.
Why does so called USC angel investors or venture capitalists have to give their blessing on the business idea? There might be many foreign entrepreneurs who might have good business ideas and give it a try with their own money.
I agree, and wonder how in the world public servants working for USCIS are going to determine who is a "qualified" angel and other complicated issues like that.
My main point was that investment visas are supposed to be about bringing in money from overseas and creating jobs in the USA. I think venture capitalists who bring in foreign talent can already do so under existing visas, and indeed already do. Like you've suggested, they should just reform EB-5 instead of creating a confusing new EB-6 that largely relies on American capital anyway. By eating up the quota for EB-5, they will be creating a monster. And the second that an EB-6 investor fails and gets his bag and baggage letter, immigration agents peddling Canada, UK and Australia will be out in force telling everyone that somehow EB-5 doesn't work, when this actually has nothing to do with EB-5. The EB-5 program is finally starting to take off after years of setbacks, and then they come up with this, which could toss a monkey wrench into something that's finally been fixed and is now running well.