EB-5 offers two statutory paths: investing through a regional center designated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), or making a direct investment in a business the investor helps manage. The minimum investment is the same for both ($800,000 in a targeted employment area, or TEA; $1,050,000 elsewhere), and the green card at the end is identical. The differences lie in how jobs are counted, what role the investor plays, how risk is distributed, what it costs, and how the petitions are adjudicated. This article compares the two paths point by point without recommending either.
Legal framework
Direct investment is the original form of EB-5, created under INA 203(b)(5) by the Immigration Act of 1990. It requires an investment in a new commercial enterprise (NCE) that creates at least ten full-time jobs. The regional center pilot program followed in 1992, allowing investors to participate in regional-center-sponsored projects and to count indirect and induced jobs derived from economic models.
The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 (RIA), effective March 15, 2022, reauthorized the regional center program through September 30, 2027 and added extensive integrity measures. Direct investment does not depend on that authorization and is unaffected by any lapse. Regional center investors are protected by a grandfathering clause: an I-526E filed on or before September 30, 2026 continues to be adjudicated even if the program later lapses.
Job counting: the central difference
| Item | Regional center | Direct |
|---|---|---|
| Countable jobs | Direct, indirect, and induced | Direct only |
| Method | Economic models (e.g., RIMS II, IMPLAN) applied to spending or revenue | Actual W-2 full-time employees of the NCE or its wholly owned subsidiaries |
| Caps | Indirect jobs may not exceed 90% of required jobs; jobs from construction lasting under two years may count for at most 75% | No cap, but each job must be a qualifying full-time position of at least 35 hours per week |
| Evidence | Economist’s report, spending records, construction progress | Payroll records, Forms I-9, quarterly tax filings |
In the regional center model, jobs are calculated: if the project actually completes the spending or generates the revenue described in the business plan, the model’s output supports the I-829. In the direct model, jobs are hired: the investor must prove the enterprise actually employed enough qualifying U.S. workers during the relevant period, and independent contractors do not count. Labor-intensive businesses such as restaurants, retail, or manufacturing can meet the requirement comparatively easily; capital-intensive businesses with lean staffing may struggle.
For more on how models work, see How Job Creation Is Calculated.
Control and involvement
A direct investor is usually the owner or principal shareholder of the business and must, under 8 CFR 204.6, be engaged in its management, either day-to-day or at the policy level. Holding a limited partner interest with the rights afforded by partnership law is generally treated as sufficient. In return, the investor has far more say over how funds are used, how the business is run, and when to exit.
Regional center investors are almost always limited partners or non-managing LLC members. The general partner or manager makes operating decisions. The investor is passive, which means no obligation to run a business or to live near the project.
Risk profile
The two paths carry different kinds of risk; neither is categorically “safer.”
Regional center risk is concentrated at the project level: whether the developer completes on time, whether EB-5 is too large a share of the capital stack, whether the job cushion is adequate, whether the regional center operates in compliance, and whether the loan is repaid at maturity. Each investor is one of many and has little individual influence. Since the RIA, third-party fund administration, I-956F project approval, and I-956G annual reports add layers of external oversight.
Direct investment risk is concentrated at the operating level: whether the business survives beyond two years while sustaining ten full-time positions, whether the investor is able to run a U.S. business, and whether immigration goals conflict with commercial ones (for example, keeping unprofitable positions to maintain the headcount). There is no I-956F pre-approval; USCIS examines the business plan at the I-526 stage and the investor bears the full burden of proof.
Under either path, capital must remain at risk. There can be no guaranteed return, and any promise of “guaranteed repayment” or a “guaranteed green card” is a red flag.
Cost comparison
| Cost item | Regional center | Direct |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum investment | $800,000 (TEA) / $1,050,000 (non-TEA) | Same |
| Petition | I-526E, $3,675 plus $1,000 EB-5 Integrity Fund fee (from November 30, 2026: $7,850 plus $1,100) | I-526, $3,675 (from November 30, 2026: $7,615) |
| Regional center administrative or subscription fee | Typically charged by the project; amount varies | None |
| Business plan and economic report | Prepared by the regional center and shared across investors | Investor commissions business plan and counsel at own expense |
| Later forms | I-485, I-829, etc., the same | Same |
Form fees above reflect the USCIS fee schedule effective April 1, 2024; always check the current schedule. Direct investment avoids regional center administrative fees, but the investor pays for the business plan, legal and accounting work, and all operating costs, and commits substantial personal time.
Process differences
- Project pre-approval. A regional center must file an I-956F for each project and obtain approval. Investors may file I-526E while the I-956F is pending, but adjudication depends on its approval. Direct investment has no I-956F step.
- Investor petition. Regional center investors file I-526E; direct investors file I-526. Both may file I-485 concurrently when a visa number is available and the applicant is in lawful status in the United States.
- Adjudication focus. In an I-526E, USCIS defers to the business plan and job model already accepted in an approved I-956F and concentrates on the investor’s source and path of funds. In an I-526, the business plan, job projections, and source of funds are all examined from scratch.
- Processing priority. USCIS prioritizes I-526E petitions tied to rural set-aside projects. A direct investment located in a rural or high-unemployment area may likewise qualify for the corresponding set-aside visa category.
- Removal of conditions. Both file I-829 within the 90 days before the second anniversary of conditional residence, but the job evidence differs as described above.
Who each path tends to suit
Regional center tends to fit investors whose primary goal is immigration status rather than running a business, who do not plan to live near the project, who prefer model-based job counting, and who accept a passive role and administrative fees.
Direct investment tends to fit investors who already have a concrete U.S. business plan or an existing enterprise, who are willing to manage it personally, whose business is labor-intensive enough to sustain more than ten full-time positions, who want greater control over funds and exit, or who wish to be entirely independent of the regional center program’s authorization status.
Pooled direct investments, in which several investors fund one enterprise, do exist, but each investor must still demonstrate ten direct jobs and may not count indirect employment.
Key takeaways
- Both paths require the same investment and lead to the same green card; the decisive difference is job counting, with regional centers able to count indirect and induced jobs and direct investors limited to actual full-time employees.
- Regional center investors are passive; direct investors must participate in management and carry operating risk.
- Direct investors file I-526 with no I-956F pre-approval; regional center investors file I-526E and rely on the regional center’s I-956F.
- Direct investment avoids regional center fees but shifts business-plan, legal, and operating costs onto the investor.
- Under either model, capital must be at risk, with no guaranteed return or guaranteed green card.