Category: News

Invest in the USA (IIUSA) released the following response to the recent letter sent to President Donald J. Trump from U.S. Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), and Josh Hawley (R-MO) urging a suspension of the EB-5 program and several other employment-based immigration categories until “unemployment has returned to normal levels.”

We find the Senators’ position to shut down the EB-5 immigrant investor program to be deeply troubling. If they are genuinely looking for opportunities to repair the economic damage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the EB-5 program is a proven job creation and retention tool. It is not an employment hindrance. It should be part of their solution to create thousands of new U.S. jobs at no cost to the U.S. government.

Proof of EB-5 as an economic engine is in the government’s own data. The U.S. Department of Commerce found that each EB-5 investment would result in the creation of 16 American jobs. Between 2008 and 2015, the EB-5 program generated more than $20 billion in economic investment that created more than 730,000 American jobs. That is amazing, especially when we recognize the $20 billion was NOT American taxpayer dollars.

The U.S. government concluded the EB-5 program creates U.S. jobs at no cost to the taxpayer. While the full extent of COVID-19’s economic damage is unknown, there are already concerns over the growing federal deficit and potential tightening of the domestic credit and finance markets. If we move to eliminate any portion of valuable international investments, the road to recovery will be even longer and more painful. We point to the Congressional Budget Office report that scored the EB-5 program as revenue-neutral, with administrative costs paid for by applicant fees.

Aaron Grau, IIUSA Executive Director, stated, “IIUSA has been at the forefront of working with Congress and the Administration to bring needed reforms to the program. We emphatically support oversight and reform to allow for even more investment to the United States.”

He continued, “Suspending the EB-5 program would be another devastating blow to the U.S. economy. The EB-5 Program has the potential to attract billions of dollars, save more than 100,000 household incomes, and create and retain jobs, all at no cost to the U.S. taxpayer.”

Source: iiusa
Published: 11 May 2020

Thailand’s sought-after Thailand Elite Residence Program has seen a significant increase in applications from US citizens since the start of the year and the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The latest sales figures reveal that the number of US applicants in just the first three months of 2020 is already more than 50% of the total US applicants for the whole of 2019. This is due in part to coronavirus-induced travel restrictions, with US citizens currently in Thailand opting to stay and enjoy the benefits of living in Thailand on a more permanent basis. However, US application numbers from outside the country have also spiked, with Q1 2020 recording a 100% increase in US applicants compared to both Q1 2019 and Q4 2019.

Dominic Volek, Managing Partner and Head of Southeast Asia at leading international residence and citizenship advisory firm Henley & Partners, says Thailand continues to be the destination of choice for entrepreneurs and investors. “Entrepreneur investors remain the largest category of applicants for the Thailand Elite Residence Program thanks to Thailand’s excellent global reputation as a business center and innovation hub.”

A similar recent surge in demand to reside in Thailand can be seen in applicants from Australia, afflicted this summer by both devastating bush fires and the coronavirus. Henley & Partners reports that the total number of Australian applicants for the Thailand Elite Residence Program in Q1 2020 was more than half the number of Australian applicants for the whole of 2019. Compared to Q1 2019, there was a staggering increase of 228% in Australian applicants in Q1 2020, and 130% when compared to Q4 2019.

The Thailand Elite Residence Program has gone from strength to strength since the Thailand Privilege Card Co., Ltd appointed Henley & Partners as global concessionaire in 2017, with sales increasing by 70% over the past three years. According to Mr. Somchai Soongswang, President of Thailand Privilege Card Co., Ltd., the operator of Thailand Elite Card, “Henley & Partners has contributed a tremendous effort to promote the program, and Thailand is seeing the benefits.”

Since Henley & Partners became the official global concessionaire, the Thailand Elite Residence Program has expanded considerably and now has over 8,600 members — a figure that is expected to cross the 10,000 mark this year. Over the past three years there has been significant uptake by certain nationalities in particular; the numbers of British and French applicants have increased by 75% and 73%, respectively, while the number of Japanese applicants has risen by a remarkable 161%.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has triggered a significant spike in general interest in investment migration among wealthy individuals and their families who consider it a unique and powerful hedge against volatility and wider value destruction. As Volek explains, “The uncertainty and instability caused by the COVID-19 pandemic are driving more wealthy individuals to reevaluate their priorities and seek alternative options for residence, and the Thailand Elite Residence Program is the perfect choice. Investing in the program enables them to transition to a new life in one of the world’s most desirable destinations, which offers an excellent and very affordable quality of life, and where they feel more comfortable and secure.”

One of Thailand’s drawcards is its excellent universal healthcare system, which was ranked as 6^th– best in the world last year by CEOWORLD Magazine. Thailand has world-class, international-standard hospitals in its larger urban centers, and the country has been praised for having one of the lowest rates of transmission and fatalities of COVID-19 in the world.

Source: henleyglobal.com
Published: 12 May 2020

The current Individual Investor Programme (IIP) should be suspended until a new, restructred scheme is introduced, the Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry has insisted.

In an e-meeting with Alex Muscat, Parliamentary Secretary for citizenship and communities, the Chamber made a set of proposals aimed at strengthening the IIP scheme, with a view to ensure it is consistent with the country’s efforts to consolidate the country’s reputation while ascertaining the highest level of good governance.

The proposals stemmed from the Chamber’s document on good governance which it had presented to Government in January.

In its proposals, it reiterated its call for a new, strengthened scheme which would feature changes to the length of effective residence required from persons applying for IIP, as well as improvemenets to the criteria related to the rental requirement for a residential property. The Chamber believes this ought to be adequate and suitable for the applicant and his/her dependents.

The Chamber also proposed a further strengthening of the due diligence processes coupled with a suitable and professional marketing of the scheme.

More tangible and value-driven expectations of investment in Malta, as well as solid legislation for the accreditation of agents was also called for, the Chamber said.

Muscat welcomed the Chamber’s proposals and vowed to keep close consultation as the government designs a new scheme.

Chamber president David Xuereb said that teh Chamber appreciated the considerable flow of funds the IIP scheme has attracted and how those funds were put to good use, even in the context of the COVID-19 economic crisis.

But he insisted that such programmes should not come at the cost of the country’s reputation, but rather be structured to support it. He pledged the Chamber’s full support to Government in the formulation of the new regulations to ensure that the new scheme was compatible with good governance and aligned with all efforts aimed to further improve the country’s reputation.

Source: maltatoday.com
Published: 8 May 2020

That some nine-tenths of participants in Québec’s Immigrant Investor Program (QIIP) break their perfunctory promise declaring that the Francophone province is their “intended destination” has long been a point of contention, especially in British Columbia and Ontario, the actual destinations of the bulk of investors.

Explanations for why so few of Québec’s immigrants end up settling in the province have ranged from relative lack of an immigrant milieu compared to Vancouver and Toronto to Asian unfamiliarity with French language (if Québécois can be characterized as such) and bitingly cold winters compared to Vancouver’s mild coastal climate.

While calls for both the provincial government in Québec and the federal government in Ottawa to enforce the declaration emerge with regularity, neither authority have any political means of doing so.

That is because the right of mobility, settlement, and work anywhere within Canada is guaranteed by Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a right that the Federal government – to say nothing of the government in any particular province – has no power to change (the House of Commons, the Senate, and two-thirds of the provinces representing over 50 percent of Canadians must approve any changes to the Charter or any part of the constitution).

New Brunswick is among the few provinces that have found a way of “enforcing” the unenforceable promise by making its immigrants buy a bond, the liquidation of which is contingent upon proof of residence within the province as demonstrated through tax returns.

Québec, however, which enjoys 100% of the capital invested through the QIIP while passing more than 90% of the public costs otherwise associated with those individuals (education, healthcare, and so on) on to municipalities like Vancouver in British Columbia and Toronto in Ontario, has little incentive to introduce a New Brunswick-style solution.

Between 2014 and 2018, the share of main applicants who reported that their primary address was in the province of Québec has hovered between seven and eight percent but in 2019 it has risen sharply.

Between January and October 2019, fully 13% of main applicants and 15% of dependents reported that their primary residence was in the province of Québec. What explains the sudden rise?

“It could have something to do with the taxes levied on non-residents in Ontario and certain municipalities in British Colombia,” suggests Canadian-born immigration lawyer David Lesperance. Such taxes, introduced in recent years in response to the rising share of predominantly Chinese purchasers of real estate who contribute to price growth but leave their apartments unoccupied.

“Many of these “ghost-investors” [nominal residents who, in reality, spend most of their time abroad] are wising up to the fact that property acquisitions in Vancouver and Toronto have become not only much more expensive in recent years but also more taxed than in Québec,” he explains.

Source: imidaily.
Publishd: 11 May 2020

Application volumes and processing speeds are holding up remarkably well for the program, despite widespread immigration office closures and a global pandemic.

The April statistical release from the Portuguese Borders and Immigration Service (SEF) show 53 main applicants (along with 93 of their family members) obtained golden visas in Portugal during the month no the back of investments amounting to some EUR 28 million. While noticeably lower than the 70 cases approved in February, the April number came within two applications of matching the figure for March (55) and actually surpassed it by EUR 800,000 in terms of total capital investment.

Raising any capital at all during a state of emergency is a commendable achievement in itself; bringing in investments amounting to almost 60% of its monthly average over the last 12 months, a herculean one.

In our monthly statistical reports on Portugal this year, we’ve also kept track of the degree to which applicants are inclined to pick what we call “alternative investments”, i.e., any investment category except that pertaining to subparagraph 3, which requires a EUR 500,000 investment in real estate. Historically (and, on a cumulative basis, presently), nine out of 10 applicants have chosen the conventional real estate investment route. In the last 18 months or so, that ratio has begun to shift noticeably in favor of alternative assets.

Subparagraph 4, which offers a lower minimum investment requirement (EUR 350,000) to those who acquire properties deemed in need of renovation, is rapidly becoming a category to be reckoned with; the share of investors who chose this option has nearly doubled since 2018, and stands at 22% of the total so far this year.

The equally priced venture capital/investment fund option, meanwhile, to which only seven applications were attributed last year, added another seven in the month of April, bringing the all-time total to 17 cases, ten of which were recorded this year.

In aggregate, alternative investments account for more than 30% of all applications so far in 2020, up from 24% last year and just one in three years ago.

In the first four months of the year, 259 main applicants and 515 dependents have received golden visas in Portugal. All told, the SEF has approved 8,466 applications since the program’s opening in November 2012, 88% of whom have invested in real estate.

Source: imidaily.com
Published: 7 May 2020

Just as most of the world’s nations were preparing to implement the first-ever comprehensive global agreement on migration, the COVID-19 outbreak fundamentally shifted the way human mobility is managed. Most countries have resorted to migration management tools such as border closures or travel bans to contain the spread of the pandemic, and public-health considerations are now at the heart of policy decisions on mobility. These developments come as a test for the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration and international cooperation on migration more broadly: how flexibly can the pact formally approved by 152 governments at the UN General Assembly in late 2018 adjust to these new circumstances?

This year is supposed to be about bringing the compact from paper to reality. For the first time, states will come together in regional review fora in the second half of 2020 to present and share progress on national action plans. These meetings offer a chance to demonstrate the relevance of the compact at a time when the pandemic presents a common challenge to states across the migration continuum. However, governments may have a difficult time bringing attention to the meetings or moving to implementation of tangible compact deliverables at a time they face more pressing domestic concerns. Overhanging all this is the knowledge that the political price to enact the compact was extremely steep for some states and may now have been for naught if the agreement fails to deliver on its ambitions.

As the conversation on the compact’s implementation resumes under a new reality, the ripple effects of the pandemic may be felt at two levels in particular. First, the coronavirus outbreak risks lowering states’ level of ambition precisely at a time when the momentum of the regional review meetings could be used to make the pact’s value more tangible—both for states and for migrants themselves. Following up on national action plans might move lower on the political agenda in light of public health or economic worries. And in a world reshaped by responses to the virus, some countries now face unanticipated constraints in implementing their priority objectives or providing technical assistance and capacity building to partners. Meeting one of the compact’s objectives, the facilitation of safe and dignified return for migrants and asylum seekers ineligible to remain in a country, has become even more difficult in the wake of African bans on the landing of many flights coming from Europe, for example.

Second, financing will be a heightened concern as new competition to fund other priorities could have spinoff effects on the Multi-Partner Trust Fund, a start-up fund intended to help state and nonstate actors implement objectives under the pact. The current fundraising strategy focuses on kickstarting the pact’s implementation quickly to increase the fund’s visibility to potential donors. Yet with palpable progress on the ground likely to materialize more slowly than anticipated, this strategy might not play out as intended. Before the coronavirus outbreak, countries such as Denmark, Germany, and the United Kingdom had slowly started to pledge contributions to the fund. Given ongoing sensitivities around the compact in Europe, some other EU Member States have so far not made financial commitments to the fund, and the European Union opted to directly support UN Migration Network activities instead. Now, as major donor countries find themselves at the epicenter of the pandemic, governments may be less inclined to free up resources for the trust fund. And while the looming global recession makes it even more important to use the 9.7 million euros pledged so far wisely, including on coronavirus-related projects such as facilitating migrants’ access to health care, it also creates greater uncertainty whether the fund will meet its initial 23 million euro target for 2020 and where the threshold of future funding ambitions should lie.

Does the Global Compact on Migration Matter in this New Era?

The global pandemic is causing many states to look inward and reconsider their interconnectedness and dependency on other countries. At a time when countries are under severe economic strain and the tendency to put national interests first is even more pronounced than usual, international cooperation on an already sensitive topic such as migration will only become more difficult. But the pandemic also offers a chance to make the case for the necessity of the compact by showing how enhanced multilateral engagement helps governments address issues at home. From a public-health perspective, the virus does not distinguish between nationals or migrants, and having a two-tiered system in place to access essential medical service during this health crisis serves no one’s interest. Although travel has become severely restricted, some migration remains critical. For example, securing supply chains and preventing shortages of essential migrant workers—from seasonal agricultural workers to health-care professionals working abroad—is a vital concern in many countries. The safety and working conditions of these workers must be safeguarded. Here, the compact’s objective on fair recruitment and safeguarding decent work, in which states commit themselves to identify best practices in labor mobility at all skills levels, could provide an umbrella framework for guiding governments’ responses within and across regional dialogues.

How exceptional the current circumstances are and how sweeping the changes will be for human mobility going forward depend on how long the pandemic’s repercussions will be felt. Even now, it is clear the guiding principle that set the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration in motion in the first place still holds: states need to work together beyond bilateral and regional cooperation to find more effective ways to address migration. The COVID-19 pandemic has sharply underscored the futility of states trying to manage transnational challenges on their own. At the same time, multilateral engagement on migration remains fragile and will continue to come under attack—especially if agreements such as the compact appear toothless in practice in the face of common concerns. The upcoming regional review meetings and the compact process writ large will now need to prove their usefulness in offering a framework to guide conversations and joint responses, and perhaps even become a center of gravity for thinking through what managing human mobility looks like in a post-COVID-19 era. The coming months will be critical to show the compact is up to the challenge.

Source: reliefweb.int
Published: 28 April 2020

In 2050, the average global life expectancy will be 77.1 years – 4.5 years more than today. That is the assessment of the UN Department for Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), which launched the report. The authors note, however, that the average life expectancy in prosperous world regions exceeds the one of disadvantaged countries by more than seven years today.

The data show that nine countries will account for about half of the global population growth: the DR Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Tanzania and the USA. On the other hand, the populations of 55 countries are forecast to shrink by at least one percent by 2050. The UN even expect reductions of 20 % and more in some countries, including Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine.

There are typically two reasons that make a country’s population dwindle, according to the UN: fewer births and outward migration. Bangladesh and Nepal are listed among the ten countries said to be most affected by emigration because people hope to find better livelihoods elsewhere. Syria and Myanmar are included too, the reason is that people flee civil strife.

The statistics reveal that 36 countries took in more than 200,000 people from 2010 to 2020. These figures include temporary migration in search of livelihoods. In nine countries where population ageing has already advanced considerably, the number of immigrants exceeded those of emigrants, cushioning the population decrease. According to the UN, the populations of Germany and Italy actually increased due to immigration.

The UN experts generally consider migration to be good because it allows millions of people to escape poverty. As they point out, safe and regulated migration is necessary to best tap the potential.

On the other hand, the authors warn that demographic trends will make it harder to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as planned by 2030. They stress that countries with comparatively young populations, where many young girls are not yet of childbearing age, will still see the numbers of births increasing for some time. The same countries have comparatively high rates of maternal mortality and the greatest unmet need for contraceptives and family-planning information (see Mahwish Gul in Focus section of D+C/E+Z e-Paper 2020/04). The report points out that they must prepare for many more children, especially in the health and education sectors.

At the global level, however, the age group of those over 65 is the fastest growing cohort. In 2018, it included more members for the first time than the age group under five, according to the UN. By 2050, there will be more than twice as many people over 65 as under five. To ensure elderly people’s welfare, their access to health care must be guaranteed, and pension systems must improve, the authors demand.

Source: dandc.eu
Published: 3 May 2020

Despite the negative economic impact on the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, the region still experiences positives, said Governor of the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank (ECCB) Dr.Timothy Antoine.

“One legacy of the pandemic, I hope, will be stronger health systems because our countries had to invest significant sums in our health systems. Therefore, a legacy benefit will be a stronger system which then enhances the value proposition for our countries in respect of Citizenship by Investment,” said Governor Antoine, at the May 02 edition of the National Emergency Operations Center (NEOC) COVID-19 Daily Briefing. “Because, going forward people need to know that they will be safe, that their health will be looked after. So, that is potentially some good news.”

The severe drop in oil prices was also one of the positive impacts outlined by Governor Antoine.

“Another piece of good news is the fact that oil prices currently are very low. In fact, those of us who fill up at the pump will see the… benefit because we are paying less to fill up our tanks,” he said. “The other good news about low oil prices is that we are paying less to import oil and, of course, as oil-importing countries, we spend significant sums every year in oil imports. So that is a very good piece of news in a very bleak economic picture because as the saying goes a dollar saved is a dollar earned.”

Continuing on a positive note, Governor Antoine noted that the Eastern Caribbean (EC) Dollar “remains very strong.”

“As of Friday, April 24, our dollar was backed by foreign reserves 100.3 percent. And as I said on a previous occasion our strong buffers will serve our currency union very well in this difficult season.”

Source: sknvibes.com
Published: 2 May 2020

On March 18, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services temporarily suspended in-person services at its field offices, asylum offices, and application support centers (ASCs) to help slow the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19). USCIS is readying offices to reopen on or after June 4. Employees in these offices are continuing to perform mission-essential services that do not require face-to-face contact with the public while the offices are closed.

While offices are temporarily closed, USCIS will continue to provide limited emergency in-person services. Please call the USCIS Contact Center for assistance with emergency services.

USCIS field offices will send notices to applicants and petitioners with scheduled appointments and naturalization ceremonies impacted by the extended temporary closure. USCIS asylum offices will send interview cancellation notices and automatically reschedule asylum interviews. When the interview is rescheduled, asylum applicants will receive a new interview notice with the new time, date and location of the interview. When USCIS again resumes operations for in-person services, USCIS will automatically reschedule ASC appointments due to the temporary office closure. Individuals will receive a new appointment letter in the mail. Those who had InfoPass or other appointments must reschedule through the USCIS Contact Center once field offices are open to the public again. Please check to see if the respective office has been reopened before calling the Contact Center.

Please also visit uscis.gov/coronavirus for updates. For the latest information on the status of an office, visit https://www.uscis.gov/about-us/uscis-office-closings.

Source: uscis.gov
Published: 24 April 2020

Headline:
Demand for EB-5 visas from qualified job creating investors far exceeds the congressional limit of approximately 10,000 immigrant visas per year (including family), resulting in lengthy quota backlogs for most EB-5 investors, and up to 15 years for investors from China.

Headline:
For a combination of reasons that will be discussed below, despite the huge demand and the lengthy quota backlog, EB-5 numbers for this fiscal year will likely not be used, in large quantities, and will be lost forever.

Headline:
President Trump issues an Executive Order (“Proclamation”) stating that virtually all immigrant visa categories will be shut down for the next 60 days. Most expect that the ban on immigrant visas will be extended beyond 60 days, possibly through the election. Notably, EB-5 is exempted from the immigrant visa ban, presumably because the ban is based on unprecedentedly high unemployment whereas EB-5 is a job-creating visa.

I suggest that at a time when EB-5 demand is far greater than supply, qualified EB-5 immigrants are waiting in line, EB-5 quota numbers are in jeopardy of being lost forever and the President issues an Executive Order favoring EB-5 because of the importance of job creation especially in these times, we should not be sitting back and allowing the EB-5 numbers to be lost. The good news is that we are not sitting back and waiting.

There are six reasons why we are in jeopardy of EB-5 numbers not being used this year in large quantities and being lost forever:

1. USCIS processing times are longer than ever (with USCIS considering 4 years to be average processing time). Fewer I-526 petitions are being adjudicated than at any time in recent memory.
2. For EB-5 investors with approved I-526 petitions who are in the U.S., USCIS has increased processing times for the I-485 applications and in many cases instituted an interview requirement, which creates further delays.
3. Many EB-5 immigrants with approved I-526 petitions who have been interviewed for their immigrant visas at U.S. consulates have been placed in indefinite administrative processing with no reasons given.
4. The Department of State, faced with the spectrum of EB-5 numbers being lost, decided to move Chart A for China by only a total of 6 weeks during the last 2 months.
5. Faced with the spectrum of lost EB-5 visas, USCIS has chosen not to implement Chart B, which would allow for more adjustment of status applications that could be adjudicated during this fiscal year.
6. S. consulates are closed around the world, resulting in delays in interviewing investors with approved I-526 petitions. The good news is that it is likely that consulates will be reopening in plenty of time for EB-5 applicants with approved I‑526 petitions to be scheduled for interviews this fiscal year, especially if no interviews can be scheduled for other immigrants because of the Executive Order.

There are two possible strategies for preventing the loss of EB-5 numbers forever. The first strategy would be to get USCIS and the Department of State, on their own initiatives or with prodding from the Administration, to take steps to expedite the processing of all EB-5 petitions, EB-5 immigrant visa applications and EB-5 adjustment of status applications. This author views the chances of that happening as being exceedingly slim.

The other option is litigation, and that is the option that our law firm will be pursuing imminently because time is short.

Depending upon the number of interested investors, we intend to file at least three or four separate multiple plaintiff mandamus/APA unreasonable delay complaints in federal court in early May.

1. Complaint seeking USCIS expeditious adjudication of adjustment of status applications for approved EB-5 immigrants.
2. Complaint seeking expedited adjudication of pending I-526 petitions to enable those applicants to complete the adjustment of status process or immigrant visa process by the end of this fiscal year.
3. Complaint seeking expedited adjudication of all DS260 immigrant visa applications for EB-5 immigrants who have already been interviewed and whose applications are in administrative processing.
4. Complaint seeking expedited adjudication of all EB-5 immigrants with approved I-526 petitions who have filed DS260 immigrant visa applications and are awaiting interviews.

All of these complaints will share certain elements in common:

• They will all seek adjudication before September 30, which is the end of the fiscal year and the date on which unused EB-5 numbers will be lost;
• They will all include counts for mandamus and unreasonable delay under the Administrative Procedure Act;
• They will all cite to the Executive Order, both for the proposition that the Executive Order indicates a clear intention to give priority to EB-5 and because the result of the Executive Order is that no other immigrant visas can be issued;
• All complaints will include as many plaintiffs as possible since relief will only apply to the named plaintiffs. It is our goal to have as many EB-5 immigrants approved for immigrant visas during this year’s quota, both to ensure usage of all available EB-5 numbers this year and to prevent the largest number of people possible going into the next year’s quota.

Source: klaskolaw.com
Published: 27 April 2020