I have a potential EB-5 business investment for which an IMPLAN economic analysis was conducted. The business wants to change the way jobs are reported from the revenue model in the study to counting jobs directly through W-2 forms. Does this seem feasible? Have there been any cases where a regional center has submitted an I-526 that uses W-2 forms as a way of calculating direct jobs, and at the same time used just the indirect/induced job calculations from an IMPLAN study for the same project?
Based upon recent EB-5 policy determinations, as long as the required jobs have been created at the I-829 stage, then the I-829 will be approved. That is, changes in job creation methodology, whether it is IMPLAN or direct employment creation, should not be an issue.
The concept of material change is still a bit murky, but regional centers can count direct, indirect and induced jobs using acceptable methodology, including IMPLAN. Changes to the economic methodology can be made through amendments or even other I-526 filings. At the I-829 stage, the actual counting of the jobs may not amount to a material change.
It is acceptable to change the method of showing job creation, but the USCIS will question why the regional center/project wants to do so. A project may be doing so well that it has at least 10 direct full time jobs per EB-5 investor, so it does not need to count indirect jobs. On the other hand, the change may reflect some underlying change in the project''s financial or operating structure. The main - perhaps only - reason a project will associate with a regional center is to use indirect job counting. It is unusual for a regional center project to switch from indirect to direct job counting. Before proceeding, the investor should perform some due diligence to understand the change in job creation methodology.
I do not see a problem with it. Proving direct jobs through W-2''s is the preferred way from the USCIS viewpoint.
