A partnership can be commercially balanced while raising unresolved E-2 questions about treaty ownership, control and committed capital. Review the real agreement before describing either partner as an eligible treaty investor. The business’s funding needs and immigration requirements should be assessed together. The practical choice is whether to sign the deal as presently structured or renegotiate ownership, control or funding terms before capital is committed. Hypothetical example: A specialty-coffee roastery software founder and a US co-owner plan equal contributions, but the operating agreement gives the US co-owner sole authority over banking, hiring and sale decisions. The investor should map treaty ownership and real control before closing. A fair commercial partnership may still require a different structure or a different immigration plan. Prepare a closing memorandum naming owners, control rights, funds source, commitment point and opening assumptions. This forces a decision on unresolved deal terms before capital is exposed. It also helps ensure that later immigration evidence describes the enterprise the investor actually chose to operate.
Connect ownership to the relevant nationality
Hypothetical example: a Guelph buyer negotiates veto rights in a U.S. bicycle-repair partnership after contributing funds through escrow. Trace the owners through any holding companies and verify citizenship. Establish the required treaty-national ownership of the enterprise; Canadian addresses and a Canadian incorporation certificate do not alone answer that nationality question. Trace ownership from the enterprise to natural persons, including holding companies, trusts or side arrangements. Record nationality, voting percentage and control rights at each step. The decision is whether the treaty-national ownership requirement is actually met under the governing documents. Do not rely on a friendly understanding that is absent from the signed agreement.
Read voting rights alongside contribution amounts
Identify who directs operations and which decisions require consent. Explain deadlocks, vetoes and management authority accurately. A larger cash contribution does not necessarily establish control, and equal ownership should not be assessed without its governing terms. Turn the funding plan into a transaction timeline. Identify source, transfer, escrow condition, purchase price, equipment, inventory, working capital and the point at which money can be lost in the business. Decide whether to accept an escrow condition, revise it, or commit under a different commercial sequence. The supporting records should show real exposure, not a merely reserved account balance.
Test commitment and viability
Document lawful source and path and the actual investment arrangement, including conditions and working capital. E-2 has no fixed universal minimum and does not use EB-5’s ten-job rule. A credible operating plan still needs to address the applicable nonmarginality standard. Test the business plan against a nonmarginal operating future. Link anticipated revenue to pricing, capacity, customers, premises and staffing rather than a broad demand claim. The decision is whether the plan supports proceeding at the proposed scale, increasing the investment, or reconsidering the venture. Immigration evidence cannot turn an underfunded enterprise into a viable one.
What else is on your mind?
Is there one minimum investment that guarantees E-2 eligibility?Is holding money or owning an asset enough for E-2?Editorial source review: 2026-09-07. General preparation guidance, not an individual assessment.