{"id":21376,"date":"2019-04-17T14:25:58","date_gmt":"2019-04-17T18:25:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=21376"},"modified":"2019-04-17T14:26:01","modified_gmt":"2019-04-17T18:26:01","slug":"the-eb-5-investor-visa-program-deserves-to-die-now-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2019\/04\/17\/the-eb-5-investor-visa-program-deserves-to-die-now-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"The EB-5 Investor Visa Program Deserves To Die Now"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The intention behind the EB-5 investor visa program was noble. Spur economic growth in impoverished parts of the U.S. by allowing foreign nationals to obtain green cards in exchange for invest<\/a>i<\/a>ng at least $1,000,000<\/a> in a new commercial enterprise. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The reality of the EB-5, however, is different as the\nprogram has been a bigger financial benefit to the noble class than those living\nin the targeted employment areas (TEAs) it was meant to uplift. And that\nreality has been known for some time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2015, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)\u00a0issued a report<\/a> noting that \u201cfraud risks in the EB-5 Program are constantly evolving, and they continually identify new fraud schemes.\u201d A year later, New York finance broker Howard Michaels characterized EB-5 as the \u201ccrack cocaine\u201d<\/a> of real estate financing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just last month, Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote<\/a> the Trump administration urging them to finalize proposed rules of the EB-5 program. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cFor years, we have watched with growing alarm as the\nEB-5 program has strayed further and further away from what Congress envisioned,\u201d\nwrote the senators, who argued the new regulations would \u201cre-align\u201d the current\nprogram with Congress\u2019 original vision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fraud and misappropriated funds for one project in Vermont was so bad, the state\u2019s EB-5 program was shut down<\/a>. The Obama administration tried to get reforms<\/a> through Congress. They failed despite widespread recognition of the systemic weaknesses in the program and the likelihood for abuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If anyone has any doubts, simply consider how New York\nstate drew well outside the geographic and ethical lines to get approval for\nHudson Yards, a luxury real\nestate development in Manhattan that was partly financed through EB-5.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cAs a community bordered by\u00a0expensive neighborhoods\u00a0such as Chelsea and Hell’s Kitchen, Hudson Yards was too wealthy on its own to qualify for the EB-5 program. To solve the problem, the state included a few census tracts from Harlem as part of the overarching TEA,\u201d reported Business Insider<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In an excellent expose<\/a> on how EB-5 was exploited to finance Hudson Yards, CityLab\u2019s Kriston Capps pointed out that unbeknownst to them, the residents of public housing projects in Harlem helped build the development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe mega-luxury of this mini-Dubai was financed in\npart through a program that was supposed to help alleviate urban poverty.\nHudson Yards ate Harlem\u2019s lunch,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What the Trump administration does related to\nfinalizing the new rules remains unclear. What is likely is that the system\nwill continue to be gamed at the expense of the poor and rural areas in need of\ntaxpayer financing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you can\u2019t mend it, just end it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The intention behind the EB-5 investor visa program was noble. Spur economic growth in impoverished parts of the U.S. by allowing foreign nationals to obtain green cards in exchange for investing at least $1,000,000 in a new commercial enterprise. The reality of the EB-5, however, is different as the program has been a bigger financial<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":66,"featured_media":17525,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[11],"tags":[1169,1524,5288,4366],"yst_prominent_words":[2122,2874,2056,2695,5281,5286,5285,5287,2697,5282,5280,2331,5284,1944,3284,1946,1991,4537,5283,2376],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21376"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/66"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21376"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21376\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21377,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21376\/revisions\/21377"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17525"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21376"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21376"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21376"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=21376"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}