EB-5 Direct vs Regional Center: two investment options for Vietnamese investors
This article compares the two investment options. If you are researchingwhat an EB-5 Regional Center isand how to choose a regional centre, please see the dedicated article:What an EB-5 Regional Center is and 6 criteria for choosing a reputable regional centre.
EB-5 Direct vs Regional Center is the first and most important decision every investor considering theVisa EB-5must face. The two options have the same minimum capital threshold, the same requirement to create 10 jobs and both lead to a conditional green card, but they differ fundamentally in investment structure, how jobs are counted, the degree of hands-on involvement and the real risks.
Sau khi EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act 2022 (RIA)took effect, the line between the two routes has been drawn more clearly than ever. The new rules completely ban pooling several investors’ capital into a Direct project, while tightening oversight of Regional Centers through the Integrity Fund and periodic audits. For Vietnamese investors, a clear understanding of EB-5 Direct vs Regional Center is essential for choosing the model that fits the family’s financial profile, business experience and settlement goals.
Message
Basic concepts in EB-5 Direct vs Regional Center
EB-5 Direct is the option of investing directly in a New Commercial Enterprise (NCE) that the investor sets up or acquires. According toUSCIS guidance on EB-5 classification, Direct investors must be the owner or co-owner of the business, take a substantive part in its management and be directly responsible for job creation results. Direct petitions are filed on Form I-526 — the Immigrant Petition by Standalone Investor.
EB-5 Regional Center is the option of investing indirectly through a regional centre designated by USCIS. The regional centre acts as an intermediary: raising capital from multiple EB-5 investors, organising the financial structure and allocating capital to job-creating projects (Job-Creating Entity — JCE). Regional Center petitions are filed on Form I-526E — the Immigrant Petition by Regional Center Investor — together with an I-956F filed beforehand by the regional centre.
According to historical data fromU.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), about 90–95% of EB-5 petitions after the RIA have been filed through Regional Centers, with the rest Direct. This ratio reflects the practical ability to meet the job creation requirement and suitability for individual foreign investors.
Considering a residency programme? The Prosperous Living Investment team assesses your profile free of charge and advises on the pathway that fits your goals.
Investment thresholds — the most important similarity
One common point of confusion is the minimum investment threshold. Both EB-5 Direct and Regional Center apply the same capital levels:
- $1,050,000 USD for projects located outside atargeted employment area (TEA) under EB-5.
- $800,000 USD for projects in a TEA (Rural, High Unemployment or Infrastructure).
These thresholds do not depend on whether you invest through Direct or a Regional Center, but on the location and characteristics of the project. Both levels are fixed until the end of 2026 and will be adjusted in line with CPI-U every 5 years under the RIA.
A small difference relates to the Infrastructure category: according to USCIS, infrastructure projects managed by government agencies are only feasible through the Regional Center channel, because the structure of Infrastructure projects requires the indirect job-counting mechanism that only Regional Centers may use. In practice, Direct investors cannot access the Infrastructure category.
How the 10 jobs are counted — the core difference between EB-5 Direct and Regional Center
The requirement to create 10 full-time jobs within 2 years is the core of the EB-5 programme and applies to both options. However, how jobs are proven and which jobs count differ completely between Direct and Regional Center.
Direct — only direct jobs count
Direct investors may only count direct jobs — that is, full-time (W-2) employees actually hired by the NCE. Each position must meet three conditions: at least 35 hours a week, lasting at least 2 years, and filled by someone eligible to work in the United States (a US citizen, permanent resident or lawful worker).
Staff hired through third parties (construction contractors, outsourced services) do not count as direct jobs. Nor do the investor and their family members. Proof includes employment contracts, payroll records, W-2 forms and Form I-9 for each employee over the entire 2-year period.
This makes EB-5 Direct challenging for small and medium-sized businesses. A mid-sized restaurant, retail shop or workshop finds it very hard to keep 10 full-time employees continuously for 24 months without staff turnover, especially in the start-up phase or during a local economic downturn.
Regional Center — indirect and induced jobs also count
Regional Centers may count three types of jobs: direct, indirect and induced. Indirect jobs are positions created at suppliers and partners linked to the project — for example, a construction contractor’s workers or a materials supplier’s staff. Induced jobs are positions arising in the local community when project employees and supporting-industry employees spend their income.
Unlike Direct, a Regional Center does not have to prove each specific position. Instead, an Economist Report using an economic model (usually RIMS II or IMPLAN) calculates the impact of the invested capital on the regional economy. This method lets a large Regional Center project easily generate hundreds of indirect/induced jobs from significant construction spending.
In practice, many Regional Center projects can meet an investor’s 10-job requirement through indirect and induced jobs alone, which can make up to 90% of the total jobs counted. This is one of the main reasons most Vietnamese investors choose a Regional Center.
Degree of operational involvement — Active vs Passive
The degree of operational involvement is the second fundamental difference between EB-5 Direct and Regional Center. The two models represent two completely different investment philosophies.
Direct investors are active investors. They must take a direct part in managing the business, make strategic decisions or hold a policy-making role in the NCE. USCIS does not require investors to live in the United States full-time, but a Direct petition must prove substantive involvement in the business, not merely being a purely financial shareholder.
Regional Center investors are passive investors. Under the Limited Partnership structure common in Regional Center projects, the investor is a Limited Partner — with no management rights and no role in running the project, only receiving returns as agreed. All responsibility for management, legal compliance and petition processing lies with the regional centre and the project development partner.
This has important practical implications. Vietnamese investors without experience running a business in the United States, without fluent business English, or with no intention of leaving Vietnam in the early stages usually prefer a Regional Center. Conversely, business people already running a company who want to expand into the United States can take advantage of Direct.
Risks and legal protection
Both options carry business investment risk and immigration risk, but the nature of the risks differs.
Risks of EB-5 Direct
The biggest risk of Direct lies in the ability to create and sustain 10 real jobs. According to USCIS trend data, Direct petitions have a significantly higher rate of Requests for Evidence (RFE) or Notices of Intent to Deny (NOID) than Regional Center petitions, mainly related to evidence of job creation. If the business declines in the 2 years after the conditional green card, the investor risks being unable to remove the green card conditions at the I-829 stage.
The second risk is purely commercial operating risk. The investor bears all the market, staffing, legal and financial risks of the business. Direct petitions also have longer I-526 adjudication times, averaging 36–60 months compared with 18–30 months for Regional Center I-526E petitions.
On the other hand, Direct has the advantage that all the invested capital and profits belong to the investor, with no sharing with other investors or a regional centre. The investor also has full control over the exit strategy.
Risks of EB-5 Regional Center
The main risk of a Regional Center is counterparty risk — the investor depends on the capability and reputation of the regional centre and the project development partner. A regional centre whose designation is terminated by USCIS, or a project that goes bankrupt midway, can threaten the investor’s EB-5 eligibility.
However, the RIA added a protection provision in INA 203(b)(5)(M) allowing “good faith investors” to keep their eligibility in many situations where a regional centre’s designation is terminated. According tothe official USCIS EB-5 Q&A, investors can keep their eligibility in many scenarios where a regional centre’s designation is terminated for failing to comply with administrative rules. In addition, oversight through the Integrity Fund and audits every 5 years help reduce the risk of fraud compared with the pre-RIA period.
Another risk of a Regional Center is the transparency of its financial structure. Investors need to read and understand the Private Placement Memorandum (PPM), the Limited Partnership Agreement (LPA) and the Economist Report to assess the project structure correctly.EB-5 Regional Center selection criteriaplay a key role in limiting this risk.
Summary comparison table of the two options
| Criterion | EB-5 Direct | EB-5 Regional Center |
|---|---|---|
| Petition form | I-526 | I-526E (with the RC’s I-956F) |
| Investment structure | Directly into the NCE | Through the RC, from the NCE to the JCE |
| Number of investors per project | 1 (sau RIA) | Unlimited |
| TEA capital threshold | $800,000 USD | $800,000 USD |
| Non-TEA capital threshold | $1,050,000 USD | $1,050,000 USD |
| Types of jobs counted | Direct only (W-2) | Direct + indirect + induced |
| Investor’s role | Active | Passive |
| Infrastructure category | Not feasible | Feasible |
| Concurrent Filing | Yes (if the PD is current) | Yes (if the PD is current) |
| I-526(E) adjudication time | 36–60 months | 18–30 months |
| Share of petitions (after the RIA) | 5-10% | 90-95% |
| Main risk | Creating and sustaining jobs | The RC and project partners |
Which option suits Vietnamese investors
In the EB-5 Direct vs Regional Center decision, Vietnamese investors need to assess four practical criteria.
The first criterion is experience running a business in the United States. Business people who already have a stable company, business ties in the United States, or an intention to relocate and actually run the business are usually suited to Direct. Those without this background should prefer a Regional Center.
The second criterion is the desired processing time. Families with children about to age out of protection under the Child Status Protection Act, or who need a green card as soon as possible, should choose a Regional Center in the Reserved Rural group — combining the advantages of priority processing and a current Priority Date.
The third criterion is risk tolerance. Investors with a high risk appetite who trust their own business ability can choose Direct. Investors who prioritise stability and immigration certainty usually choose a Regional Center.
The fourth criterion is long-term financial strategy. Investors who want to keep full control of their capital and profits choose Direct. Investors willing to accept low or even nominal returns in exchange for a green card choose a Regional Center.
Whichever option is chosen, source of funds documentation remains decisive for the outcome. The standards forEB-5 source and path of funds (SOF/POF)apply equally to both the I-526 and the I-526E, and are one of the leading causes of RFEs or denials.
EB-5 Direct vs Regional Center has no absolute answer — the right choice depends on each family’s specific circumstances. For most Vietnamese investors in 2026, a Regional Center combined with the Reserved Rural or High Unemployment category remains the route with the highest success rate, the shortest timeline and the best fit with the typical financial profile in this market.
Related articles in the EB-5 cluster
Accompanying you on your journey in residency investment
The Prosperous Living Investment team advises on pathways, assesses profiles and manages investments transparently for every residency, citizenship and international property objective.
Free profile assessmentWhere life gets prosperous