No. State the actual funding status and have the proposed structure assessed.
Keep contingencies visible
A sale contract or valuation is not necessarily received proceeds or invested capital. Identify what must occur and what has already happened.
Hypothetical example: a wetland-mitigation contractor expects proceeds from selling equipment but has not completed the buyer’s inspection condition. The review should label the proceeds as contingent, trace the eventual funds, and decide whether the selected EB-5 structure can be supported without representing future money as invested capital.
For EB-5, confirm lawful source and path, capital placed at risk, the required job-creation evidence, and the appropriate immigration stage. The investment must satisfy the applicable job standard, generally ten qualifying jobs, and residence after the process begins as conditional residence rather than immediate unconditional status.
A first review should produce an element-by-element table: the legal condition, the current fact, the primary record that proves it, and any unresolved issue. Start with the governing category rather than a persuasive title. If the role, money, entity, or family situation changed, identify whether the change affects an element or only the evidence. A missing fact should be marked as unknown and investigated; it should not be supplied through optimistic wording.
Record the conclusion in a short decision note: which required element is proved, which record proves it, and what event would change the answer. That note should be reviewed before travel, filing, or a revised employment commitment is made. For EB-5, compare that conclusion with the source-and-path record, commercial risk, job evidence, and separate immigration stages before choosing the next step.