Chapter 8 - Sanctions and Discretionary Determinations
A. Sanctions
The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 (RIA) authorizes USCIS to levy different types of sanctions for noncompliance by various participants in the EB-5 program, including suspensions, debarment, and termination.
1. General Process
If USCIS determines that a violation has occurred and suspension, debarment, or termination is appropriate, USCIS issues a notice of intent to sanction to the affected individual or entity. The notice includes:
- A summary of the violations; and
- A description of the length, if applicable, and terms of the sanction, for example, whether the violation might be cured.
USCIS typically provides 30 days for response after issuing a notice of intent to sanction and may, in its discretion, consider responses received after 30 days.[1] If USCIS determines, after considering any response, that suspension, debarment, or termination is warranted, USCIS issues a final notice of sanction explaining the reasons for the sanction.
USCIS may issue sanctions to more than one party for any given violation as needed. Each individual or entity receives their own notice for each sanction. For example, USCIS may both terminate a regional center and suspend an associated party.
USCIS may also issue more than one sanction to the same individual or entity for any given violation as needed. For example, USCIS may first suspend, but later, after a new notice of intent to sanction, terminate a regional center if the regional center does not take remedial action or new facts support a different sanction.
If USCIS terminates a regional center, it may end other sanctions against the entity. USCIS includes any such decision about earlier sanctions in the final notice of sanction.
A sanctioned individual or entity may appeal the sanction to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO).[2] Each party who receives their own notice of sanction must file their own appeal if they wish to contest the sanction.
Where applicable, USCIS considers all relevant factors when deciding on the appropriate severity of the sanction, including, but not limited to:
- History of previous violations, including violations that predate March 15, 2022, and violations of other areas of the law;[3]
- The willfulness or recklessness of the violation, including concealment of material facts or prohibited actions;
- Good faith attempts to achieve rapid compliance after notification of a violation;
- Harm to the reputation or integrity of the EB-5 program;
- Cooperation with USCIS or other governmental agencies;
- Any relevant disciplinary history;
- If an entity, senior management’s awareness of and involvement in the conduct;
- If an entity, the entity’s risk management process, the comprehensive nature of its monitoring plan, and resource allocation;
- If an entity, the level of training and communication about misconduct;
- If an entity, its reporting structure and investigation process;
- If an entity, the level of due diligence to its third party relationships;
- If an entity, the impact of such a sanction on innocent parties;
- Whether the violation involved a national security or public safety concern; and
- Whether the violation involved either multiple or repeated instances of fraud or material misrepresentation.
Suspensions, debarments, and terminations are final upon the expiration of the period in which to file an appeal or, if appealed, upon the decision on that appeal. Investors need only reassociate within 180 days of their receipt of USCIS notification of the debarment or termination to take advantage of the ability to reassociate under INA 203(b)(5)(M).[4]
2. Types of Sanctions
Suspensions
Suspensions typically last for the period specified in the notice or, as applicable, until the individual or entity cures the violation. A suspension continues until the end of the date specified in the notice, if included in the notice. If no date is listed, the suspension lasts until USCIS determines that the violation has been cured and notifies the individual or entity that it is lifting the suspension.
Generally, suspension refers to temporarily disallowing the suspended individual or entity from some or all forms of participation in the EB-5 program. For regional centers, a suspension does not terminate the regional center designation and the regional center must continue to comply with all requirements applicable to designated regional centers, including the filing of annual statements and annual payment of the EB-5 Integrity Fund fee. The notice identifies the specific activities in which the individual or entity is prohibited from participating.
In general, during the period a regional center is suspended:
- USCIS may continue to adjudicate Immigrant Petitions by Regional Center Investor (Form I-526E) for investors affiliated with an approved Application for Approval of an Investment in a Commercial Enterprise (Form I-956F);
- USCIS may hold adjudication of pending Form I-956F applications and any associated Form I-526E petitions; and
- USCIS may reject or deny any new Form I-956F applications from the suspended regional center.
In general, during the period a new commercial enterprise or job-creating entity is suspended, where USCIS has approved a Form I-956F application, USCIS holds adjudication of investor Form I-526E petitions associated with that project.[5]
Officers issuing notices of suspension, however, retain discretion to determine the scope of suspensions on a case-by-case basis.
Debarments
Debarment by USCIS typically prevents individuals or entities from participating in the EB-5 program, precluding all future involvement of the individual or entity with the EB-5 program. While the INA provides authority to terminate the participation of new commercial enterprises or job-creating entities in the EB-5 program,[6] USCIS has not and does not designate new commercial enterprises or job-creating entities for participation in the program as it does and has done for regional centers. Moreover, these provisions of the INA do not distinguish between termination of a regional center’s designation and the other types of sanctions that could apply to new commercial enterprises or job-creating entities that would similarly end their participation in the EB-5 program, such as debarment.[7]
Importantly, the good faith investor protections[8] only arise upon either the termination of a regional center or debarment of a new commercial enterprise or job-creation entity. Consequently, termination of a new commercial enterprise or job-creating entity other than debarment would not trigger these investor protections, contrary to Congressional intent. USCIS therefore interprets its authority to terminate the participation of new commercial enterprises or job-creating entities in the program as equivalent to debarment and debars such entities as appropriate under applicable authorities permitting their termination from the program.
In general, USCIS debars individuals or entities based on noncompliance with or prohibited conduct under applicable statutory provisions[9] and does not debar individuals or entities for merely failing to establish investor eligibility for visa classification or removal of conditions, such as not creating sufficient employment, or upon receipt of requests for debarment.
With respect to threats to the national interest and fraud, misrepresentation, deceit, and criminal misuse,[10] USCIS also permanently debars any individual or entity associated with a regional center, new commercial enterprise, or job-creating entity that has had its designation or participation in the EB-5 program terminated or has been debarred on these grounds if USCIS determines, in its discretion, that such individual or entity was a knowing participant in the conduct that led to the termination or debarment.[11] USCIS may consider debarment based on actual or constructive knowledge and direct or indirect participation.
If USCIS debars a regional center, new commercial enterprise, or job creating entity, it also notifies affected investors. Upon notification, affected investors have 180 days to reassociate with a new regional center, new commercial enterprise, or job creating entity.[12]
Terminations
When USCIS terminates a regional center, that entity is no longer designated under the program and may not file project applications or solicit investors. If USCIS terminates a regional center, it also notifies affected investors. Upon notification, affected investors have 180 days to reassociate with a new regional center or new commercial enterprise.[13]
B. Discretionary Determinations
USCIS denies or revokes the approval of an EB-5 related petition, application, or benefit (which may include termination of regional center designation or debarment of a new commercial enterprise or job-creating entity, as applicable) if USCIS determines, in its discretion, that approval of the petition, application, or benefit is contrary to the national interest for reasons relating to threats to public safety or national security, or if the petition, application, or benefit is predicated on or involved fraud, deceit, intentional material misrepresentation, or criminal misuse.[14]
The exercise of discretion in all situations may not be arbitrary, inconsistent, or dependent on intangible or imagined circumstances.
1. National Interest Grounds
In general, under INA 203(b)(5)(N) threats to public safety may include, but are not limited to, aggravated felonies as defined at INA 101(a)(43). National security concerns may include, but are not limited to, activities described in INA 212(a)(3)(A) (general security and related grounds), (B) (terrorist activities), or (F) (association with terrorist organizations) or INA 237(a)(4)(A) (general security and related grounds) or (B) (terrorist activities).
2. Fraud and Related Grounds
Fraud and Intentional Material Misrepresentation
The statutory language of INA 203(b)(5)(O) differs from fraud and material misrepresentation findings otherwise made by USCIS for admissibility under INA 212(a)(6)(C). Existing agency guidance regarding fraud and misrepresentation in the inadmissibility context is specific to fraud or misrepresentation committed by an individual or entity against the U.S. government.
However, the authority to take adverse actions based on determinations under INA 203(b)(5)(O) with respect to whether an EB-5 petition, application, or benefit is predicated on or involves fraud or misrepresentation is broader and not limited solely to fraud or misrepresentations made by an individual or entity against the U.S. government.
While general USCIS guidance on inadmissibility concerning willfulness, intent, and materiality is relevant to determining whether an EB-5 petition, application, or benefit was predicated on or involves fraud or misrepresentation, the guidance below expands on that existing guidance to cover the additional situations covered by INA 203(b)(5)(O).[15]
USCIS interprets the statutory terms, generally, in accordance with their plain language meanings and in each case as related to the petition, application, or benefit.
For fraud findings made under INA 203(b)(5)(O), USCIS generally considers a petition, application, or benefit to have been predicated on or involve fraud based on a finding that an individual or entity related to the petition, application, or benefit knowingly made a false representation of or knowingly concealed a material fact with intent, for example, to induce action or to deceive.[16]
For findings of intentional material misrepresentation under INA 203(b)(5)(O), USCIS generally considers a petition, application or benefit to have been predicated on or involve intentional material misrepresentation based on a finding that an individual or entity related to the petition, application, or benefit made a false or misleading assertion about a material fact with the intent to deceive.[17]
Deceit
USCIS generally considers a petition, application, or benefit to have been predicated on or involve deceit based on a finding that an individual or entity related to the petition, application, or benefit intentionally led another person to believe something that is not true.[18]
Criminal Misuse
USCIS generally considers a petition, application, or benefit to have been predicated on or involve criminal misuse based on a finding that an individual or entity related to the petition, application, or benefit improperly used the EB-5 program or capital obtained through the EB-5 program in connection with or in furtherance of a crime.
In the context of the EB-5 program, criminal misuse is most likely to arise in the context of misuse of EB-5 capital in connection with or in furtherance of financial crime.[19]
Examples of actions that may trigger findings under INA 203(b)(5)(O)
Types of fraud, deceit, intentional material misrepresentation, or criminal misuse that may arise with individual investor petitions; those associated with regional centers, new commercial enterprises, and job creating entities; attorneys; migration agents; preparers; and promoters may include but are not limited to the following actions:
- The applicant, petitioner, or beneficiary engaged in financial fraud or financial crimes, including misappropriation of funds (Ponzi scheme, embezzlement, wire fraud, etc.);
- The applicant or petitioner falsified claims of job creation, economic development, or both;
- The applicant, petitioner, or beneficiary intentionally misrepresented the information provided or intentionally omitted required information;
- The attorney, preparer, promoter, or migration agent intentionally misrepresented the EB-5 program to an immigrant investor, either current or future;
- The attorney, preparer, promoter, or migration agent represented themselves as a registered broker but was not registered;
- The applicant or petitioner falsified one or more responses to the bona fide question set under INA 203(b)(5)(H);
- The applicant or petitioner falsified information about their background on a form (such as their credentials, education, employment), or presented altered or counterfeit documents;
- The applicant, petitioner, or beneficiary misrepresented, or concealed the source of funds or the path of funds;
- The petitioner presented derivatives that are not legal family members; or
- The petitioner or derivative assumed an alternate identity to attain an immigration benefit.
Footnotes
[^ 1] USCIS generally follows the procedures at 8 CFR 103.2(b)(8)(iv) regarding requests for evidence and notices of intent to deny.
[^ 2] See INA 203(b)(5)(P)(i)(V).
[^ 3] While USCIS does not sanction a regional center based directly on pre-RIA violations or violations of other areas of the law, USCIS may still consider significant or recurring pre-RIA violations or violations of other areas of the law for the purpose of evaluating the severity of sanctionable post-RIA violations of applicable provisions of the INA.
[^ 4] For more information on good faith investors, see Chapter 3, Immigrant Petition Adjudication, Section E, Good Faith Investors following Program Noncompliance by a Regional Center, New Commercial Enterprise, or Job-Creating Entity [6 USCIS-PM G.3(E)].
[^ 5] USCIS understands that treatment of investor petitions associated with an approved Form I-956F for a suspended new commercial enterprise or job-creating entity differs from treatment of investor petitions associated with an approved Form I-956F for a suspended regional center; however, the scope of involvement of these entities with respect to any particular Form I-956F is different and the suspension of a regional center does not terminate its designation and may not necessarily impact the bases for investor eligibility of a previously approved Form I-956F. Conversely, the suspension of a new commercial enterprise or job-creating entity associated with a previously approved Form I-956F directly implicates bases for eligibility of associated investors since they derive benefits directly from the conduct of such entities. Consequently, USCIS generally continues to adjudicate Form I-526E petitions associated with a previously approved Form I-956F for a suspended regional center but reserves the right to hold adjudication of such petitions should the circumstances warrant (such as where the basis for regional center suspension implicates the investment offering or project associated with a previously approved Form I-956F).
[^ 6] SeeINA 203(b)(5)(H)(iv), INA 203(b)(5)(N)(iii), and INA 203(b)(5)(O)(ii).
[^ 7] See INA 203(b)(5)(G)(iii)(II) which, unlike INA 203(b)(5)(H)(iv), INA 203(b)(5)(N)(iii) and INA 203(b)(5)(O)(ii), authorizes debarment to end the participation of non-regional center persons in the EB-5 program while limiting usage of the term termination to sanctioning a regional center’s designation.
[^ 8] See INA 203(b)(5)(M).
[^ 9] See, for example, INA 203(b)(5)(G)(iii)(II)(cc), INA 203(b)(5)(H)(iv), INA 203(b)(5)(I)(iv), INA 203(b)(5)(K)(ii), INA 203(b)(5)(N)(iii), and INA 203(b)(5)(O)(ii).
[^ 10] See INA 203(b)(5)(N)-(O).
[^ 11] See INA 203(b)(5)(N)-(O).
[^ 12] For more information on how investors may retain eligibility following debarment or termination, see Chapter 3, Immigrant Petition Adjudication, Section E, Good Faith Investors following Program Noncompliance by a Regional Center, New Commercial Enterprise, or Job-Creating Entity [6 USCIS-PM G.3(E)].
[^ 13] For more information on how investors may retain eligibility following debarment or termination, see Chapter 3, Immigrant Petition Adjudication, Section E, Good Faith Investors following Program Noncompliance by a Regional Center, New Commercial Enterprise, or Job-Creating Entity [6 USCIS-PM G.3(E)].
[^ 14] See INA 203(b)(5)(N)-(O).
[^ 15] To the extent that USCIS makes a finding in accordance with INA 203(b)(5)(O) and a finding of fraud or willful misrepresentation under INA 212(a)(6)(C) that would impact an individual’s admissibility, USCIS annotates those findings separately.
[^ 16] See definition of “fraud,” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).
[^ 17] See definition of “misrepresentation,” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).
[^ 18] See definition of “deceit,” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).
[^ 19] See definition of “misuse,” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).