EB-5 Grandfathering Ends September 30. Here Is What a Filing Actually Protects.

Regional center petitions filed on or before September 30, 2026 keep statutory protection if Congress lets the program lapse. That protection is narrower than most marketing suggests, and a rushed filing can forfeit it.

Private Client6 min read
Accurate as of

Two dates govern the EB-5 Regional Center Program, and investors routinely confuse them. September 30, 2027 is when the program's authorization runs out. September 30, 2026 is the last day to file a regional center petition that keeps statutory protection if that authorization is not renewed. The second date is the one on the calendar right now.

What the statute says

The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 (RIA) reauthorized the regional center program "through September 30, 2027." 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(5)(E)(i). It also added a continuity provision. If the program expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security "shall continue processing petitions" based on a regional center investment "that were filed on or before September 30, 2026," and may not deny those petitions, or suspend visa allocation for them, because the program lapsed. 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(5)(S).

In practical terms: an investor whose Form I-526E is properly filed by September 30, 2026 is insulated from the single largest structural risk in the regional center model, which is Congress failing to act on time. That happened in 2021, when the program lapsed for roughly nine months and pending cases stalled.

What it does not protect

Grandfathering is a shield against one event. It does nothing else.

  1. It does not guarantee approval. A grandfathered petition is adjudicated on the same eligibility standards as any other: lawful source of funds, capital at risk, job creation, and a compliant project.
  2. It does not create a visa number. Availability is controlled by the Visa Bulletin. In the September 2026 bulletin, EB-5 unreserved final action dates were current for most of the world, December 1, 2016 for mainland China, and unavailable for India. The State Department warned that the unreserved category could retrogress before the fiscal year closed. Fiscal year 2027 numbers become available October 1.
  3. It does not speed anything up. Processing times are unchanged.
  4. It does not protect the project. If the regional center or the new commercial enterprise fails, grandfathering does not cure that.
  5. It may not reach later filings. The statutory text speaks to petitions "filed on or before September 30, 2026." Investors should not assume that a later filing tied to the same investment inherits the protection without advice on their own facts.

The direct EB-5 model, where the investor places capital in a business without a regional center, is not subject to the sunset at all. For investors who want operational control and can meet direct job creation, the grandfathering deadline is irrelevant.

The real risk is a defective filing

The protection attaches to a petition that is "filed." A package that USCIS rejects at intake is not a filed petition, and a refiled package after September 30 is on the wrong side of the line.

Three problems cause most last-minute rejections:

  • Fees. EB-5 filing fees have moved through litigation and a pending rulemaking over the past year. The correct amount must be confirmed against USCIS the day the check is cut, including the separate EB-5 Integrity Fund fee paid with each investor petition.
  • Form edition. USCIS has been enforcing edition cutoffs across its forms this year without grace periods. Confirm the edition on uscis.gov immediately before filing.
  • Signatures and payment. An unsigned form or a declined card payment ends the analysis.

A petition that is technically filed but thin on source of funds is a different problem. It keeps its grandfathered position and then draws a request for evidence or a denial on the merits. Filing to beat the date is reasonable only if the evidentiary record can be completed after filing.

The finance side of a rushed subscription

Most investors who are filing this month are also signing subscription documents this month, and the diligence window has compressed from weeks to days. Four items deserve attention even under deadline pressure:

  • Escrow terms. Know what triggers release of your capital to the project and what happens to it if the petition is denied.
  • Project approval status. Confirm whether the project's Form I-956F has been filed or approved, and what USCIS has actually reviewed.
  • Job creation cushion. Ask how many jobs the economic report projects per investor against the ten required, and how many investors the offering is sized for.
  • Exit timeline. The statute requires capital to be expected to remain invested for not less than two years. 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(5)(A)(i). Understand when and how the enterprise intends to return capital, and what redeployment looks like if repayment comes early.

The pending rule

On July 2, 2026, DHS published a proposed rule to implement the RIA, covering capital at risk, source of funds documentation, targeted employment area procedures, regional center oversight, and automatic revocation of petitions in cases of fraud or national security concerns. 91 FR 40676 (July 2, 2026), Docket No. USCIS-2026-0100, RIN 1615-AC94. The comment period closed August 31, 2026. It is a proposal, not a final rule, and it does not change the September 30 filing date, which is set by statute.

If you are considering filing before September 30

  • Confirm the project, the regional center's designation, and the offering documents are final.
  • Assemble source of funds evidence now, and identify what can follow in response to a request for evidence.
  • Verify fee and form edition on the day of filing, and use a delivery method with proof of receipt.
  • If a September filing cannot be done properly, weigh the direct model or an October filing with a clear understanding of the sunset risk.

A deadline is a good reason to move quickly. It is not a reason to file a petition that will not survive adjudication.

Sources

Lidice Samper, Esq.
Written by
Lidice Samper, Esq.
Founder & Managing Attorney

Founder and Managing Attorney of Samper Law, Lidice leads the firm's uncompromising litigation standards with relentless advocacy and strategic precision honed across federal and state courts.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. Immigration law and agency policy change frequently; the analysis above reflects our understanding as of the date noted. Readers should consult counsel regarding their specific circumstances.