Author: Niu Ltd

To access the data sheet on the Portugal (GRP) program results as of 30th April 2016, please click here.

On Wednesday April 20th, IIUSA hosted its 11th Annual General Membership Meeting (“AGM”) in Washington, D.C., kicking off the 9th Annual EB-5 Advocacy Conference, the longest running EB-5 conference attended by international investment and economic development professionals around the world.

The IIUSA membership elected one new officer and three new directors to the board. Stephen Strnisha, CEO of Cleveland International Fund, was chosen as the new Secretary-Treasurer, while Daniel J. Healy, CEO, Civitas Capital Group, Charles Foster, Chairman, Foster Global LLP and Kyle Walker, Managing Partner, Green Card Fund, LLC were elected to the board of directors.

In addition, Robert G. Honts, CEO, Texas Lone Star Enterprises, accepted the honorary position of Secretary-Treasurer Emeritus and William P. Gresser, President, EB-5 New York State Regional Center, accepted the honorary position of Director Emeritus.

In addition, IIUSA recently appointed new committee chairs for three of its 10 standing committees. The 2016-2017 chairs are:  William P. Gresser (Public Policy Committee), President, EB-5 New York State Regional Center, Kristen Laughlin (Membership Committee) CMO, Cleveland International Fund and Daniel B. Lundy, Partner, Klasko Immigration Law Partners & Mark Roberts, VP, Alliance Bank of Arizona (Co-Chairs, Banking Committee).

 

Re-Elected (Officers): 

President: K. David Andersson, CEO, WORC Regional Centers (2010-Present)

• Member Since: 2006
• Director (2007-2010)
• President (2010-current)
• President’s Advisory Council (2011-current)
• Company Webpage: www.eb5worc.com 

Vice President: Robert C. Divine, Chair of Global Immigration Practice, Baker Donelson Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, P.C. (2010-Present)

• Member Since: 2010
• Vice President (2010- current)
• President’s Advisory Council (2011-current)
• Public Policy Regulations Task Force (2014- current)
• Company Webpage: www.bakerdonelson.com

 

Newly Elected (Officer): 

Secretary-Treasurer: Stephen Strnisha, CEO, Cleveland International Fund  

• Member Since: 2012
• Public Policy Committee Chair (2015-2016)
• Company Webpage: clevelandinternationalfund.com

 

Newly Elected (Directors): 

Charles Foster, Chairman, Foster LLP 

• Member since: 2009
• Company Webpage: www.fosterglobal.com

Daniel J. Healy, CEO, Civitas Capital Group

• Member since: 2011
• Best Practices Committee Chair (2013-2015)
• Nominations Committee Chair (2013)
• Presidents Advisory Council (2014-Current)
• Company Webpage: www.civitascapital.com

Kyle Walker, Managing Partner, Green Card Fund LLC 

• Member Since: 2010
• Chair Membership Committee (2013-2016)
• Presidents Advisory Council (2013-Present)
• Company Webpage: greencardfund.com

 

New Emeritus Officers & Directors:

Secretary-Treasurer Emeritus: Robert G. Honts, CEO, Lone Star Enterprises

• Member Since: 2009
• Secretary-Treasurer (2010-2016)
• President’s Advisory Council
  (2011-current)
• Chair, Budget & Finance Committee (2010-current)
• Chair, Bylaws Committee (2011-present)
• Association Building Committee (2014-current)
• Chair, Membership, Dues, Bylaws Committee (2010-2011)
• Editorial Committee (2014-present)
• Company Webpage: texaslonestarenterpriseseb5.com

 

Newly-Appointed Committee Chairs 

In addition to changes listed above, IIUSA would like to announce the appointment of new committee chairs three of its 10 standing committees.

Public Policy: William P. Gresser, President, EB-5 New York State Regional Center

Membership: Kristen Laughlin, Chief Marketing Officer, Cleveland International Fund 

Banking: Daniel B. Lundy, Klasko Immigration Law Partners & Mark Roberts, VP, Specialty Banking Manager, Alliance Bank of Arizona

 

A full listing of each IIUSA committee, along with their respective charter, can be found here. IIUSA committees convene on a monthly basis and report to the membership at the annual membership meeting in Washington, DC each spring.
If you are interested in serving on an IIUSA Committee, please carefully review the Committee Participation and Policy Agreement and fill out the Committee Interest Form.

 

 

Posted: 27 April 2016
Source: IIUSA

The St. Lucia government is strongly defending its Citizenship by Investment Programme (CIP) in the face of harsh criticism from an expert in residence and citizenship planning, who described it as poorly designed and lacking transparency and said his firm declined a contract to be a marketing agent for it.

In a statement seeking to correct “misconceptions and inaccuracies” about St. Lucia’s economic citizenship programme in an interview with Managing Partner at Henley and Partners, Dr. Juerg Steffen, the Citizenship by Investment Board stood by the CIP.

Asked to give his impression of St. Lucia’s CIP, Steffen had said in the interview published on the firm’s website, that “the programme as it appears now is not well designed and has a number of issues, including structural problems and the lack of transparency”.

He identified several fundamental problems, and the Citizenship by Investment Board responded to them. Of particular concern was his claim that “there has been no transparency or open tender process” for engaging agencies to market the CIP.

The Board said a selective tendering process was used where three recognized marketing agents were invited to make presentations to Board and the names of those selected – Arton Capital, CS Global Partners and Henley and Partners – were published as required by law.

“The Citizenship by Investment Board will not publish details of contracts entered into with any of its service providers, just as it will not publish the details of negotiations and communications with Henley and Partners. To do so would be unprofessional, even as it serves to illustrate that Steffen’s comments represent a new position which had not been previously expressed to us,” it said.

The Board said that Henley and Partners, which had expressed a desire to be the exclusive marketing agent, declined to partner on the progamme.

In his interview, Steffer confirmed the firm’s refusal of the contract.

“We chose to decline the offer because we will not risk damaging our reputation by being involved in the current set up of the programme,” he claimed.

Steffer also had an issue with the CIP’s low real estate investment requirement of US$300,000 – lower than the requirement of US$400,000 in Antigua and Barbuda and St. Kitts and Nevis, and US$350,000 in Grenada.

“St. Lucia therefore positions itself just above Dominica, which has a real estate investment requirement of US$200,000 and is at the bottom end of the market. St. Lucia’s tourism is much more upmarket, as is its real estate market, and thus it should be placed at least on par with Antigua and Barbuda, currently the most important Citizenship by Investment Programme in the Caribbean. Why would you want to place St. Lucia at a lower price band? It kind of cheapens the country’s image,” he said.

“In addition to this, the definition of qualifying real estate seems to be problematic, as it appears to include investments in shares. This raises questions of security regulations both in St. Lucia and everywhere those shares are promoted to investors. All those involved in promoting such shares would need to be licensed in the relevant jurisdictions. Not impossible, but difficult, and bringing a lot of future risks to the country for no obvious benefit when straightforward real estate purchase has worked well to date.”

But the Citizenship by Investment Board said so far there has been tremendous interest in St. Lucia’s real estate projects, precisely because the tourism product is upmarket. It added that the US$300,000 price point is a minimum requirement and does not determine the market price set by the developers.

“Furthermore, our programme is targeted to the development of our tourism product rather that the sale of residential properties which further accounts for the price differential. We wish to clarify that CIP St. Lucia does not award citizenship for the purchase of shares in the development company,” it said.

Steffen also criticized the requirement for every applicant to submit a sworn affidavit to declare financial resources of at least US$3 million. He argued that it is likely to be off-putting to many high net worth individuals.

The Board acknowledged that the issue has been a topic of much debate and there has been both negative and positive feedback on the requirement. However, it maintained that having a minimum net worth requirement is one of the ways in which CIP St. Lucia distinguishes itself.

“Given the programme is limited to 500 approvals annually, it ensures that it is indeed high net worth individuals who apply,” it explained.

Another issue Steffen identified was the introduction of a government bond option, which he described as “absurd”.

“It makes no sense to create an option to increase the country’s debt, when it is proven that investors are happy to make a non-refundable donation to a national sovereign fund, as demonstrated in other reputable and successful programs. This option is only lucrative for investors and agents, but it gives no benefits to the country. Why would a country give full citizenship to someone on the basis of a loan which has to be repaid by the nation after a few years?”

Steffen said Hungary is an example of how poorly that option works. According to Steffen, the Hungarian state actually loses money as a result.

“I doubt that this is what St. Lucia currently needs,” he said.

But the Board said Steffers’ criticism was based on a misunderstanding of the investment option.

“Annually, the Government of St. Lucia raises funds by the issuing of bonds. Often these issues are not fully subscribed and therefore there are short falls in the funding estimates. The Government of St. Lucia has made US$20,000,000 worth of bonds available for sale through the CIP.  These five-year bonds are non-interest bearing. Therefore, the bonds sold under CIP St. Lucia will significantly reduce the cost of borrowing while making the bonds more attractive,” it explained.

 

Posted: 27 April 2016
Source: caribbean360.com

 

 

Cooperation between trade associations to promote global standards of best practices for investment migration professionals 

On April 21^st, Invest in the USA (IIUSA), the U.S.-based not-for-profit industry trade association for the EB-5 Regional Center Program (the “Program”) and the Investment Migration Council (IMC), the worldwide association for Investor Immigration and Citizenship-by-Investment, announced a strategic partnership arrangement that will enhance collaboration on initiatives for industry best practices, education and development.

“As the leading EB-5 industry trade association, IIUSA is proud to commence a long-term partnership with the IMC to enhance public understanding of issues facing investment migration professionals in the U.S. and around the globe, “ said IIUSA Executive Director Peter D. Joseph. “This partnership will enable IIUSA’s existing members and partners to access a range of exciting new resources and connections to increase awareness worldwide of the EB-5 visa category.”

The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by the two organizations will lead to streamlined cooperation in the following five areas: membership exchange, conference collaboration, industry & professional development, organizational promotion and industry best practices.

Bruno L’ecuyer, CEO of the Investment Migration Council commented, “The collaboration between the IMC and IIUSA is a natural step forward for both organizations but also benefitting the investor immigration industry globally. After opening our regional office in New York a few months ago, our commitment to serving American practitioners who work in the industry is cemented through this exciting new partnership,’’ L’ecuyer said. ‘’I am personally looking forward to sitting down with many EB-5 professionals and understanding how the IMC can provide support in a global context’’.

The agreement was officially announced at IIUSA’s 9^th Annual EB-5 Advocacy Conference, the EB-5 industry’s premier conference for grassroots advocacy, industry education, networking. The conference boasted over 350 people in attendance and a full schedule of speakers, Capitol Hill visits, networking and meetings. Attendees were treated to seven Guests of Honor from the federal government, 30+ additional speakers on seven industry panels, and two nights of receptions.

The Investment Migration Forum, to be held June 6-8 in Geneva, Switzerland, will serve as another global platform to highlight the cooperation between IIUSA and the IMC.  The Forum is the world’s premier independent forum on the subject of citizenship-by-investment and investor immigration, and will discuss many issues directly relevant to IIUSA members. To learn more about the event, click here.

 

About IIUSA

IIUSA is the national not-for-profit trade association for the EB-5 Regional Center industry with a mission of advocacy, education, industry development, and research. The organization represents more than 290 Regional Centers and 230 associated members, collectively representing big and small projects, urban and rural economic development, and industry sectors ranging from real estate and manufacturing to energy and infrastructure. IIUSA’s members are engines of economic growth and job creation, accounting for over 95 percent of capital flowing through the Program.

 

To access the data sheet on the Portugal (GRP) program results as of 31st March 2016, please click here.

A former senior Canadian civil servant has been named the incoming head of the Citizenship by Investment Unit (CIU) in move that the government of Antigua & Barbuda said will reassure the international community of the programme’s transparency.

According to the government’s Chief of Staff, Lionel “Max” Hurst, Chisanga Chekwe, will assume the post of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the CIU on or about May 16.

“He came to Cabinet in large part because Cabinet wants a Canadian to head the unit of the Citizenship by Investment Programme,” Hurst said, explaining the rationale saying. “It has to do with reassuring international partners that your programme is transparent.”

“The unit has had Antiguan head it for interim periods and they are very good at what they do. This doesn’t have anything to do with inabilities on part of Antiguan and Barbudans.”

Chekwe’s credentials were more than impressive to the Cabinet of Antigua & Barbuda according to the Chief of Staff.

He confirmed that Chekwe has served for more than five years as Deputy Minister in the Ontario Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade. (The office a Deputy Minister is comparable with that of a Permanent Secretary)

 

Source: antiguaobserver.com
Posted: 22 April 2016

Since the outset of the EU migrant crisis over two years ago, countless proposals have been tabled by EU and national authorities, civil society and independent policy exponents to address some of the most salient causes and impacts of this unprecedented crisis. To date, most of the proposals that have been converted into actual policy and that have benefited from EU budget support have consisted primarily of emergency, piecemeal and intra-EU measures. These have related, in particular, to the strengthening of external border controls, including through an expanded role for Frontex and the development of the Smart Borders Package, as well as to the establishment of the largely unpopular EU Relocation Plan.

EU initiatives to actively involve non-EU source countries in the pursuit of viable solutions to the migrant crisis have only recently started to materialise, most notably with the signing of the EU-Turkey agreement on 18 March 2016, However, while the agreement appears to be impacting the level of irregular arrivals to Greece since its launch a few weeks ago, it is clearly not able to account for the fact that Turkey is only one of the main migratory routes to Europe. Concerns are therefore mounting over Libya’s gradual ascent as the next mass migration time bomb, especially in the absence of any viable government and stable institutions, as well as over the development of new entry points to the EU, particularly in Italy and in Bulgaria, since the adoption of the EU-Turkey agreement.

New initiatives, and comprehensive and operational strategies, are therefore still needed to capture the full range of persisting causes and impacts of the on-going EU migrant crisis.

One such strategy, albeit still in very embryonic form, has just been tabled by the Italian government. In a letter sent to Presidents Donald Tusk and Jean-Claude Juncker on 15 April 2016, attaching a short ‘non-paper’ titled “Migration Compact”, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi outlined a strategy for enhancing cooperation with countries of origin and transit, redirecting already earmarked EU funds and launching new sources of funding through “EU-Africa bonds” and “Common EU Migration Bonds”.

While not majoring exclusively on first-hand proposals, a number of concepts in this four-page document are novel and worthy of consideration. This is especially true in view of the positive initial reactions already expressed by many EU member states, including in the Visegrad region, as well as by the European Commission. At the EU Foreign Affairs Council of 18 April 2016, Federica Mogherini, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, stressed in particular that ‘most of the Italian proposals support the EU’s ongoing work and activities and constitute a positive political contribution’.

The main thrust in Renzi’s proposals is on the development of, and increased support for the EU’s external action strategy on migration, including through a more active involvement of key non-EU partner countries and through a better use of all existing instruments in the field of external action, particularly those directed at key African countries of origin and transit. In this respect, the idea of modulating cooperation according to partner country, through the development of a matrix reflecting each country’s migratory features and other characteristics such as economic and social trends, security and, climate change, is particularly auspicious. While the European Commission and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) have been producing national ‘Migration Profiles’ since the mid-2000s, the integration of such profiles into core EU policy development is certainly a step in the right direction.

But one of the most engaging proposals in the ‘Migration Compact’ paper no doubt relates to the identification of new methods of financing the migrant crisis, which are clearly aimed at supplementing the EU’s over-stretched disbursements in this policy area, as well of course as addressing the increasing reluctance of most member states to inject or divert additional resources in response to the lingering migrant crisis.

In particular, Renzi’s proposals relating to the launch of “EU-Africa bonds” and “Common EU Migration Bonds” are enlightening, even if similar ideas had already been aired by the Italian government in their paper on ‘A Shared European Policy Strategy for Growth, Jobs, and Stability’ in February 2016, calling for the launch of a mutualised funding mechanism to address the migrant crisis. The exact modus operandi of such a scheme of course remains to be invented and the idea of EU migration bonds will also need to face strong opposition in key member states such as Germany, which has always rejected the idea of Eurobonds. This was reiterated by Chancellor Merkel’s spokesperson on 18 April 2016, who stressed that “the German government does not see any basis for a common funding of debt for member states’ spending on migration”.

The notion of Common EU Migration Bonds, however, merits further examination. It could even draw on the lessons learned from the issuance of national solidarity bonds and debt sales to individual investors in the past. Such schemes have been tested, in particular, in Ireland, Italy and Spain, enabling individuals to easily buy government debt, including online. They appear to have facilitated the absorption of a decent size of the debt requirements, especially in Italy where household savings rates are high. Some of Spain’s autonomous regions have themselves issued “bonos patrióticos” to their citizens in the early 2010s, covering, in the case of Catalonia; over 70% of the region’s funding needs. Other examples abound, including in the United States where patriotic bonds were issued during World War II. While solidarity and empathy towards the on-going migrant crisis appear to be declining within the EU population, the launch of EU bonds that would clearly aim to reduce migratory pressures in Europe would no doubt attract interest among many segments of society. The notion of crowdfunding to support specific projects to derive from Renzi’s non-paper could also be examined, particularly in view of the size of established Syrian and Iraqi communities in a number of member states.

The interest generated by Renzi’s document since its publication a few days ago therefore appears to be justified. While some of the Migration Compact proposals, for example those relating to further cooperation on returns/readmissions, resettlement schemes and the fight against trafficking in human beings and smuggling of migrants, have been upheld in a number of EU initiatives and Communications over the past ten years, and while it is unlikely that discussion of this document will result into any concrete measures in the near term, Renzi’s initiative is potentially a momentous one.  By aiming to involve third countries of origin and transit to such an unprecedented extent, and through such win-win modalities, the Migration Compact proposals can certainly be referred to as a “fair grand bargain”.

 

Source: neurope.eu
Posted: 20 April 2016

A ground-breaking report by a high-level commission, headed by former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, has tabled a series of far-reaching proposals for an urgent reform of the United Nations Human Rights architecture.

Composed of some of the world’s notable public leaders and thinkers, the Global Citizenship Commission (GCC) asks the international community to “recognize that asylum seekers have three rights that should not be forgotten: a right to security in transit; a right to a fair and responsible process at borders; and a right to good reason for a refusal to allow entrance or settlement”.

The Commission, established in 2013, also asks the five permanent members (P5) of the UN Security Council – Britain, France, Canada, Russia and China – to “voluntarily suspend their veto in situations involving mass atrocities”.

Further: “An international children’s court should be established, and the UN Security Council should convene a ‘Children’s Council’ – an annual review on violations of children’s rights.”

The report, titled The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the 21st Century, contains the findings and recommendations of the GCC, convened under the auspices of New York University to renew the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) for the twenty-first century. It was presented to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the UN’s headquarters in New York on April 18.

The Commission’s Chair Brown said: “Since 1948, the Universal Human Rights Declaration has stood as a beacon and standard for a better world. Yet at a time of enormous global change, a refugee crisis bigger than that which accompanied the ending of the Second World War, the increasing twin threats of terrorism and extremism, and the appalling abuse and suffering of women and children in conflict and other situations, we need to renew and revitalize our efforts to realize the rights articulated in the Declaration.

Jeremy Waldron, who chaired the GCC Philosophers’ Committee, said: “This report refreshes our understanding of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which has dominated human rights thinking since 1948.  It reaffirms the fundamental commitments of the UDHR; it proposes ways in which those commitments can be carried forward to meet new challenges. Above all, it identifies the UDHR as a pillar of our global ethics and our global responsibilities.”

The report also recommends that the UN should consider the creation of a World Human Rights Court, consistent with the principle of complementarity. The International Criminal Court should investigate and prosecute crimes against children within its remit to the full extent of the law.

At the national level, says the GCC, all states should create accessible complaint mechanisms for the resolution of violations of the rights of children, and consider establishing a Youth Parliament, Children’s Commissioner, and dedicated budget for Children

The international community should implement Target 10.7 of the recently adopted Sustainable Development Goals, which calls for states to “facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.”

The report asks all governments, international organizations, and NGOs to encourage and support human rights education.

According to the report, although human rights are important for a global ethic, they are only a part of it. Other pillars of a global ethic include:

Good governance and the rule of law, at both national and global levels.

Responsibility for planet and climate, and our obligations to future generations.

Basic humanitarian responsibility for one another, even when human rights are not directly involved.

The eradication of extreme poverty.

Outlawing aggressive war and upholding international security through the United Nations system as a basis for the resolution of global conflict.

The elimination of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.

A broad commitment to strengthening institutions such as the United Nations and its agencies, which have paramount responsibility for the well-being of the international system.

The maintenance of the cosmopolitan frameworks that enable people to relate to one another scientifically, productively, economically, and culturally all around the world.

These pillars are related to one another and they form an integrated system, says the report. Each of them has pivotal human rights dimensions but each of them also takes us beyond the field of human rights and opens up broader vistas of global obligation and participation.

“One way of thinking about human rights requirements is that they secure the foundation on which people can exercise and construct their citizenship responsibilities, whether in their own countries or in the world at large. Without the protections and liberty that human rights are supposed to secure, it would be difficult for people to lift their gaze beyond their immediate fears and deprivations,” argues the report.

The Commission thinks it is imperative, therefore, to reaffirm that human rights in general and the UDHR in particular contribute immensely to the emergence of a global ethic. A global ethic is not the same as international law. It is something like the shared moral impulse that underlies and sustains international law.

“Many things need to be comprised in a global ethic cannot be laid down in precise legal terms. At the same time, the reality of human rights institutions and the evolution of international human rights law – along with national and regional declarations of rights, and their accompanying courts – demonstrate that it is possible to build real-world institutions and practices upon these ethical foundations,” mains the report. [IDN-InDepthNews – 18 April 2016]

IDN is the flagship of International Press Syndicate.

 

Posted: 19 April 2016
Source: indepthnews.net

 

The United States Government has warned regional countries offering the citizenship by investment programme (CIP), to refrain from issuing   “unless the issuing government is confident beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual is a bona fide applicant”.

In a statement issued Wednesday, the US Embassy here said while it does not approve or disapprove individual aspects of the CIP, the participating countries must ensure that the identity of individuals is fully validated and that the applicant lacks ties to transnational criminal or terrorist organisations.

The US also noted that it understands the potential economic benefits from utilizing the citizenship by investment programme and  it is the sovereign right of all countries to choose whether or not to engage in such a programme.

“The United States strongly believes that all countries have an inherent responsibility to their citizens and the international community to review fully all applicants who seek a nation’s citizenship.”

“While the United States Government is willing to consult with governments on their citizenship investment programmes, the ultimate decisions to offer and how to operate such a programme, including the issuance of citizenship and related identifying documents, such as passports to applicants,  lie with each individual government and not with the United States,” the statement added.

Countries that have implemented CIP are Antigua and Barbuda, St. Kitts Nevis and Dominica.

St. Lucia has indicated that it will be implementing the programme shortly.

Under the CIP, foreign investors are given citizenship once they make a significant investment in the socio-economic development of the country.

Source: https://stluciatimes.com/
Date: 14 April 2016