Continued from page 21
As strong supporters of the program at the center of the
discussion in Congress, we have our own idea about what
EB-5 needs, which is why we introduced our own piece
bipartisan legislation in January 2015. H.R. 616, first and
foremost, is a permanent reauthorization of the program,
because we believe certainty is an important item to making
EB-5 work. It addresses the issue of backlog and wait times,
makes needed updates to integrity measures, and keeps the
power of designation target employment areas at the local
level. We have made it no secret that we think this legislation
is the best path forward for EB-5.
At the same time, having not been born yesterday, we both
understand that the process of passing laws is slightly more
complicated than just declaring your idea the best and having
everyone agree. There are many stakeholders that have an
interest in the EB-5 program, and some of these stakeholders
hold very senior positions in both the House and Senate.
Many have proposed reforms, either by formally introducing
bills or through informal negotiations. Some of these proposed
reforms we agree with and some we do not. But throughout
this process, we have negotiated in good faith, making our
22
priorities clear and all the while understanding that the key
to a long-term reauthorization is broad-based consensus in
Congress. At a number of points this fall, it seemed as if
consensus was on the horizon. We are optimistic that the New
Year will bring it into sight once again.
Consensus on the path forward for EB-5 should focus
on a few key issues. First, reauthorization should include
reforms that reinforce national security safeguards and lessen
investment fraud without interfering with the successes of the
program. As outlined by an August 12, 2015 Government
Accountability Office report, there are a number of important
steps that Congress should take. Largely, we agree with these
recommendations. A reauthorization without these measures
would be a missed opportunity. There is bipartisan agreement
on these fraud and security provisions, and these reforms
should form the core of any reauthorization.
Next, any reauthorization measure should continue a
program precedent of allowing both urban and rural projects
to compete on their merits in the marketplace. This approach
would be consistent with the current application of the
EB5 INVESTORS MAGAZINE