Enterline & Partners Consulting | info@enterlinepartners.com

Search
Close this search box.

U.S. District Court Rules to Overturn EB-5 Regulations; Investment Amount Reduced to $500,000 – for Now.

On June 22, 2021, Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California issued an order granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Behring Regional Center, in the lawsuit Behring filed against the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”).  The order was given in the matter of Behring Regional Center LLC V. Chad Wolf, et al.

Behring Regional Center filed the lawsuit against the DHS challenging whether the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security, Chad Wolf, had been legally appointed to his position at the time the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program Modernization regulation (the “EB-5 Regulation”) came into effect on November 21, 2019.

Under the EB-5 Regulation, the most important change to the program was the increase in the minimum investment amount from $500,000 to $900,000 for investments made in a Targeted Employment Areas that qualify for this lower investment amount.

In its lawsuit, Behring requested the Court to issue a judgment that the EB-5 Regulation is vacated (no longer valid) because acting Secretary Wolf was not lawfully serving in his role at the time the final rule was issued. The Court agreed and set aside the EB-5 Regulation and has remanded the matter back to the Department of Homeland Security.

Behring also requested the Court to issue an injunction barring the current, properly appointment Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, from reinstating the EB-5 Regulation for a period of 180 days.  The Court denied this request.

As of right now, the EB-5 Regulation is no longer the law of the EB-5 immigrant visa program.  How long this will last is uncertain.

The DHS could file an appeal with a Court of Appeals and also request its own injunction to stop the District Court’s decision from taking affect pending the appeal process. If the higher Court approves such an injunction, the EB-5 Regulation will remain in place. Whether it does or not, the DHS is likely to move quickly to reauthorize the EB-5 Regulation by following the proper procedures under the Administrative Procedures Act.  This process might take 60 to 90 days or longer.

For investors who have been considering EB-5 as a way to immigrate to the U.S. and want to take advantage of the lower investment amount of $500,000 should move quickly to file their EB-5 petitions before this window of opportunity closes and should also understand the potential risks of filing an EB-5 I-526 Petition under this time of uncertainty.

Update: The EB-5 Regional Center Program Will Lapse on June 30, 2021

For more information, please contact us today at info@enterlinepartners.com and speak with a U.S. immigration attorney in Ho Chi Minh City, Manila, and Taipei.

ENTERLINE & PARTNERS CONSULTING

Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam Office

Suite 601, 6th Floor, Saigon Tower
29 Le Duan Street
Ben Nghe Ward, District 1
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Tel: +84 933 301 488

Email: info@enterlinepartners.com

Facebook: Enterline & Partners – Dịch vụ Thị thực và Định cư Hoa Kỳ

Website: http://enterlinepartners.com

Manila, Philippines Office

LKG Tower 37th Floor
6801 Ayala Avenue
Makati City, Philippines 1226

Tel: +632 5310 1491

Email: info@enterlinepartners.com

Facebook: Enterline and Partners Philippines

Website: https://enterlinepartners.com/language/en/welcome/

Copyright 2021. This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This article may be changed with or without notice. The opinions expressed in this article are those of Enterline and Partners only.

CATEGORY
time
recent posts
CTA_Collection

Over 18,000 successful customers with Enterline &
Partners, realizing the dream of immigration

Latest News

What Is Adjustment Of Status For U.S. Immigration Purposes?

Under U.S. immigration law, Adjustment of Status (“AOS”) refers to the process through which an individual who is already in the United States applies to change their immigration status from that of a nonimmigrant visa status to that of an immigrant visa status, or “Lawful Permanent Residence”. This process is typically pursued by individuals who entered the U.S. legally on a temporary basis as a nonimmigrant and later decide to stay permanently.  One of the best examples is when a student on F-1 status to attend a four year bachelor degree program is offered a job and qualifies at the end of their studies. They may then be eligible for Adjustment of Status. All AOS Applicants must fulfill certain qualifying requirements in order to apply for Adjustment of Status. They must have entered the U.S. lawfully, such as with a valid nonimmigrant visa and be physically present in the United

Read more >

Delinquent U.S. Taxpayers in Southeast Asia

While living in the Southeast Asian region, it’s easy to forget about U.S. tax obligations, especially if the taxpayer’s income is deemed “minimal.”  Let’s first re-visit our tax filing requirements, where an excerpt is noted right on the last page of one’s U.S. Passport, “All U.S. Citizens working and residing abroad are required to file and report on their worldwide income. Consult IRS Publication 54 …” Tax practitioners may use the standard deduction as the filing threshold. For tax year 2024, single status filers can claim up to $14,600 as a standard deduction. Therefore, if one can maintain and produce supporting documentation that the tax year’s income is below the standard deduction threshold, the taxpayer may opt to not file a U.S. Income Tax Return. However, it’s good practice to still file a tax return  to show the U.S. Internal Revenue Service that your income is below the standard deduction

Read more >

Federal Court of Appeals Rules Against Trump’s EO Ending Birthright Citizenship

A Federal Court of Appeals handed the Trump Administration another blow in its fight to redefine the 14th Amendment ending birthright citizenship through Executive Order (“EO”). The San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Administration’s request for an emergency order putting on hold a nationwide ban issued by Seattle-based Judge John Coughenour last month who found the EO blatantly unconstitutional. Judge Coughenour decision was swiftly followed by Judge Deborah Boardman’s decision in Maryland who also ruled that the EO needed to be stopped. While the Trump Administration argued that Judge Coughenour’s ruling went too far, a three-judge panel disagreed and scheduled the case for arguments in June. U.S. Circuit Judge Danielle Forrest, whom Trump appointed during his first term, said that a rapid decision would risk eroding public confidence in judges who must “reach their decisions apart from ideology or political preference.” The other judges on the panel,

Read more >
Vietnam
icons8-exercise-96 chat-active-icon