PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 114-603.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 28, 2015
American Entrepreneurship and Investment Act of 2015
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to make the EB-5 immigrant investor program permanent.
Increases the targeted employment area set-aside.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to defer to state targeted employment area designations.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) establish a preapproval procedure for commercial enterprises that allows a regional center to apply for preapproval of a new commercial enterprise before an alien files a petition for classification by reason of investment in such enterprise; and (2) defer to certain prior favorable EB-5 determinations except in the case of fraud, material change, or legal deficiency.
Prohibits a person who has been found liable for specified criminal or civil activities from serving as an owner, director, or officer of a regional center.
Requires EB-5 petitions to be adjudicated within 180 days unless additional information is required.
Provides that the child of an alien investor whose conditional permanent resident status is terminated shall continue to be considered a child of the alien investor for purposes of a subsequent immigrant petition by the alien investor if the child remains unmarried and the alien investor's subsequent petition is filed within one year after termination of status.
Provides for a consolidated petition by an alien investor and his or her spouse and children.
Exempts spouses and children of EB-5 immigrants from EB-5 admissions limits.
Authorizes concurrent filing of EB-5 petitions and applications for status adjustment to conditional lawful permanent resident.
Eliminates the per-country limit for employment-based immigrants and increases the per-country limit for family-based immigrants.
Amends the Chinese Student Protection Act of 1992 to eliminate the requirement that the annual Chinese immigrant visas be reduced by a specified amount to offset status adjustments under that Act.
Subjects EB-5 petitions to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
People & committees
Rep. Polis, Jared [D-CO-2] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 114-603.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.616 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.616 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.616 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.616 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.