HOME / EB-5 INFORMATION
EB-5
Denial Rate Trends:
Direct vs. Indirect
Prior to the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act (RIA) in March 2022, USCIS reported I-526 adjudications in one bucket; those filings commingled direct and regional-center cases, which makes clean historical comparisons difficult. Post-RIA, however, USCIS split filings into Form I-526E (regional-center investors) and legacy Form I-526 (now primarily direct/standalone). This change finally allows us to observe early divergence in outcomes by pathway.
Headline Approvals/Denials Post-RIA
1.) I-526E (regional-center) approval rate
In FY2023, the first full year of I-526E adjudication, USCIS approved all 63 I-526E cases it decided—a 100% approval rate on a small sample. New filings under I-526E also exceeded legacy I-526 filings during FY2023, reflecting a shift back toward regional-center usage after the program’s re-authorization.
2.) Legacy I-526 (direct/standalone) approval rate
For the same fiscal year (FY2023), the overall approval rate for legacy I-526 decisions was 66% (approvals divided by total decisions). Note this legacy bucket still contains a mix of pre-RIA filings; however, new FY2023 filings under legacy I-526 (now primarily direct) were only 185, underscoring how small the post-RIA direct pipeline is relative to regional-center filings.
On the limited post-RIA decisions to date, regional-center cases (I-526E) are showing higher approval/lower denial rates than legacy I-526. However, the I-526E adjudicated sample is still modest and likely biased toward cleaner, early cases.
Removal of Conditions (I-829): Overall Trends and What They Signal
While USCIS does not routinely publish I-829 outcomes split by direct vs. regional center, industry tracking of USCIS tabulations points to high overall I-829 approval rates in recent periods (for example, roughly 91% approval in FY2023 Q1 across the board). The robustness of I-829 approvals is consistent with the idea that projects with strong job-creation evidence—more common in regional-center structures that can count indirect jobs—fare better at the removal-of-conditions stage. (USCIS’ own policy framework codifies the job-counting differences between direct and regional-center projects; see below.) USCIS
Why Regional-Center Cases Often Deny Less
USCIS policy permits regional-center investors to count direct, indirect, and induced jobs demonstrated through accepted input-output models (e.g., RIMS II or IMPLAN). By contrast, direct/standalone investors generally must show direct W-2 full-time positions created by the new commercial enterprise. The broader job-counting toolkit available to regional-center projects gives them a structural buffer: even if timelines slip or line-item budgets shift, qualifying expenditures can still translate into sufficient modeled jobs for each investor. This difference doesn’t guarantee approvals, but it reduces denial risk tied to job-creation proof. USCIS
Denial-Rate Dynamics Cross the EB-5 Lifecycle
At the petition stage (I-526E vs. I-526):
Denials typically hinge on (1) source- and path-of-funds deficiencies, (2) project eligibility or material-change issues, and (3) job-creation credibility. Post-RIA, the bifurcation of filings (project on I-956F, investor on I-526E) has professionalized records: more complete project files and third-party fund administration make it easier for investors to avoid project-level denials. That shows up statistically in early I-526E adjudications (100% approvals on 63 decisions in FY2023). By contrast, direct cases still rely on firm evidence of employer-employee job creation, which is harder to deliver early and more fragile under schedule/budget stress—factors that correlate with higher denial shares historically seen in the mixed legacy I-526 stream.
At the removal-of-conditions stage (I-829):
Here the fulcrum is documented job creation during the sustainment period. Regional-center projects build an “evidence pipeline” (draw approvals, contractor invoices, lien waivers, cost-to-complete curves) that ties qualifying spend to model-based job estimates. That evidentiary architecture—now widely standard post-RIA—helps keep I-829 denials relatively rare in well-run platforms. Direct projects can certainly succeed, but their job proof depends on actual payroll and operating hires, which exposes them more directly to market cyclicality and operational setbacks. (Industry snapshots place overall I-829 approvals in the high 80s to low 90s percentages in recent periods.) USCIS
Time Trends and What to Watch Next
Volumes are re-converging on regional centers
After re-authorization, filing activity tilted back toward regional-center projects; FY2023 data shows I-526E filings outpacing new direct filings, which implies future adjudication mix will be even more regional-center heavy. Expect the approval/denial split to track I-526E dynamics more than legacy I-526 as those cohorts move through the system.
Approval rates may compress as volume scales
The 100% I-526E approval rate observed in FY2023 rests on a small initial sample; as adjudication scales and cases with more complex fact patterns arrive, expect the approval rate to normalize downward—though still plausibly above direct-only filings, given the structural advantages in job counting and RIA-mandated controls.
Limitations
Pre-RIA data are commingled
Any historical charting of “direct vs. indirect” denial rates before FY2022/23 involves inference (e.g., by looking at project types or known RC affiliations). Treat those comparisons as directional, not definitive.
Small-N bias
Early I-526E adjudications likely skew toward cleaner cases with fully matured project files. The apparent gap with legacy I-526 may narrow as more varied I-526E fact patterns are decided.
Practical Takeaways for Investors and Advisors
Regional-center pathway shows lower near-term denial risk in the early post-RIA data, reflecting stronger documentation frameworks and the ability to count indirect/induced jobs. That’s visible in FY2023’s I-526E approvals and in high overall I-829 success rates tied to well-evidenced spend and job models. USCIS
Direct (standalone) projects remain viable but are statistically more exposed to denial drivers linked to payroll hiring and operational execution. Where direct is preferred (e.g., specific control preferences), mitigate risk with conservative hiring plans, robust payroll records, and contingency buffers for revenue and timelines—because job deficits map directly to I-829 denials.
Denial risk is increasingly a function of file quality, not narrative. Post-RIA, investors should privilege platforms that (a) share the I-956F record, (b) provide third-party-verified use-of-proceeds tracking, and (c) maintain a proactive evidence pipeline aimed at the I-829 from day one.
Sources
- IIUSA analysis of USCIS data showing FY2023 I-526E approvals (63/63, 100%), rising I-526E filings, and legacy I-526 approval rate (66%).
- Suzanne Lazicki (Lucidtext) summaries of USCIS “stock and flow” EB-5 data and early I-526E/I-526 comparisons.
- USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 6, Part G (EB-5), explaining job-creation counting rules for direct vs. regional-center investments (direct jobs vs. allowance for indirect/induced under regional-center model). USCIS
- Industry reporting on I-829 approval rates (e.g., ~91% in FY2023 Q1) derived from USCIS quarterly disclosures aggregated by trade associations/analysts. USCIS
Note: Where USCIS does not publish a clean direct-versus-regional-center split (especially for I-829), the analysis above identifies those limits and confines conclusions to periods and forms (I-526E vs. I-526) where the data are explicitly differentiated.
get started
Schedule a Consultation
Discuss your eligibility and review current investment
opportunities with our licensed professionals.
