From an Employer-Dependent EB-2 Process to EB-5: Kuba’s Experience With EB5AN’s Brandon Multifamily Equity Project

My name is Kuba. I’m a Polish-Canadian software engineer, and I recently invested in EB5AN’s Brandon Multifamily Equity Project.

I moved from Poland to Canada about 13 years ago. After 11 years in Canada, my family and I decided to relocate to the United States. At the time, I worked for a large corporation with offices in both countries, so I was able to transfer to the United States on an L-1B visa. Soon after arriving, I began the employment-based Green Card process through PERM and the EB-2 category.

Then I was laid off.

The layoff did more than cost me a job. It effectively erased the progress I had made toward permanent residency and left me facing the prospect of starting the employer-sponsored process again from the beginning. That experience changed how I thought about immigration risk. My family still wanted to remain in the United States, but I no longer wanted our long-term future to depend on one employer or the possibility of another round of layoffs.

EB-5 offered a different approach: a path to permanent residency that was not tied to my job. Once I decided to pursue it, I applied the same analytical process I use in my professional life. I studied the source materials, interviewed attorneys, researched regional centers, compared projects across multiple criteria, and looked closely at the tradeoff between financial risk and potential return.

In this post, I’ll explain that process and why it ultimately led me to EB5AN and the equity offering in the Brandon Multifamily Project.

Watch Kuba’s Full Interview

Watch Kuba’s Interview Highlights

Why I Moved From EB-2 to EB-5

I was already familiar with EB-5 while pursuing my EB-2 application, but the layoff made me examine it much more seriously.

For software engineers, the EB-2 process can take years. The PERM process alone involves several steps, and the entire strategy depends on continued sponsorship by an employer. When my company went through layoffs and my position was affected, I learned how fragile that arrangement could be. If I began another employer-sponsored application, a future job loss could put me in the same position again.

I wanted greater control over my family’s immigration future. That meant separating my permanent-residency strategy from my employment.

As a Canadian citizen, however, I did not have to begin the EB-5 process immediately. I first found a new employer and obtained TN status, which was a relatively quick and straightforward option in my circumstances. Once I was working in the United States under that status, I moved forward with EB-5 as the independent, long-term path to a Green Card.

I had already found references to EB5AN online while researching the program. Its website provided extensive educational material on the EB-5 process, the different types of offerings, and the steps involved in making an investment. I also scheduled a one-on-one conversation with one of EB5AN’s partners, who explained how the process and investment worked and gave me access to information on the available projects.

I am highly data-driven, so I did not make a decision based on a short overview. I read hundreds of pages to understand what I was getting into and what risks accompany a real estate investment.

Selecting an EB-5 Immigration Attorney

My first instinct was to find an attorney near me so that we could meet face-to-face. I could not find a local attorney who specialized in EB-5, so I used a list of experienced attorneys provided by EB5AN and interviewed about three candidates.

I approached those interviews after doing my own research. By the time I spoke with each attorney, I already had detailed questions: Did I understand the requirements correctly? How would they apply to my circumstances? What strategy did the attorney recommend, and why?

The quality of those answers helped me determine who genuinely understood my situation and had the experience to guide me through it. Every investor’s circumstances are different. I was not simply looking for general knowledge of the EB-5 program; I wanted an attorney who could translate that knowledge into a clear plan for my case.

Once I chose an attorney, preparing the filing was relatively efficient. Because I had already pursued an EB-2 application, I had organized many of my personal records. I even keep a dedicated drawer at home for this kind of documentation.

The requirement that was distinctive to EB-5 was documenting the source of my investment funds. In my case, the funds came from restricted stock units that had vested through my employment. The source and path of the money were not particularly complex, and the supporting records were readily available online. It took about three weeks to assemble the source-of-funds documentation and become ready to select a project.

How I Evaluated EB-5 Regional Centers

I conducted most of my regional center research online. My first question was simple: How much useful information could I access immediately, and how deeply did that information allow me to examine the organization and its projects?

I also approached the search from the opposite direction. Rather than looking only for favorable claims, I tried to find reasons not to choose each regional center. I searched for negative reports, unsuccessful projects, and evidence that investors had encountered serious problems. I wanted to understand the downside before trusting any organization with a major investment.

The differences between regional centers became apparent quickly. Some organizations appearing on the government’s official list had little more than a landing page. Other sites contained outdated information or appeared to represent operations that were no longer active. After seeing several examples like that, it was difficult to feel confident in them.

EB5AN stood out because it gave me substantial information to evaluate. Its website contained extensive materials, and its YouTube channel featured webinars on current EB-5 issues and active projects. The information was kept up to date, and my one-on-one conversation reinforced the impression that EB5AN understood both the program and its offerings in depth.

My research did not uncover meaningful negative information about EB5AN’s projects. Combined with the amount and quality of the information available publicly and directly from the team, that gave me confidence in choosing EB5AN.

Comparing EB-5 Projects With a Data-Driven Process

Choosing a regional center did not end the diligence process. I then compared EB5AN’s available projects in detail.

I created my own summary of the key data points for each offering. Among other factors, I considered the potential return, the expected investment term, how long my capital would remain invested, and whether I understood the project’s specific risks. I used those criteria to eliminate offerings that did not fit my priorities.

Job creation was part of that comparison. I reviewed the projected number of jobs, the number of investors the project expected to accept, the jobs required for those investors, and the margin between the requirement and the project’s projections. I appreciated that EB5AN’s project materials addressed those figures directly rather than treating job creation as an afterthought.

I also considered rural and urban offerings. For me, that distinction was secondary. I was born in Poland, and visa backlogs were not a significant concern for me. I therefore did not need to select a rural project solely to pursue a reserved visa category or potentially faster processing. I could focus primarily on the investment itself.

That analysis led me to the Brandon Multifamily Project.

Why I Chose the Brandon Multifamily Project

The project was at an early stage when I evaluated it and had not yet broken ground. I liked the opportunity to participate as an early investor rather than entering only after much of the development had already occurred.

The underlying business also made sense to me. I am not a real estate expert, but I considered the market for apartments in Florida more understandable than several alternative property types and locations. I had observed substantial apartment development in dense downtown markets, including near where I live, and I recognized the risk of overbuilding in those settings. I was more comfortable with an apartment project in a location that did not depend exclusively on demand in an already crowded downtown core.

People continue to need housing, and population growth supports long-term apartment demand. Based on my own assessment, I did not view demand as an unreasonable risk for this project.

I also researched the developer, The Kolter Group, using the same adversarial method I applied to regional centers. I looked for failed projects and serious complaints. The negative comments I found were the kind of isolated issues one might expect with almost any active real estate developer, not problems that changed my view of the investment. Kolter appeared to have substantial experience executing this type of project successfully.

The fact that Brandon Multifamily was EB5AN’s third Kolter multifamily project, following Boynton Beach and Terra Ceia, added another layer of confidence. Investment always involves risk, especially for someone like me who does not invest in real estate as a profession. A history of comparable projects helped make that risk easier to assess.

Why I Selected Equity Instead of the Senior Loan

The Brandon Multifamily Project offered both equity and senior-loan investment options. After comparing them, I chose equity.

The senior loan appealed to me as the more conservative option. If a project encounters serious financial trouble, senior lenders generally have priority over equity investors in the repayment order. That position can reduce the risk of losing some or all of the invested capital. The tradeoff was a lower potential return.

I did not view the EB-5 investment only as the cost of obtaining a Green Card. A substantial amount of capital would be committed for years, and the return during that period mattered to me. If the investment produced only a very low return, inflation could reduce the real value of the money while it remained tied up. There was also an opportunity cost: the capital could otherwise have been invested in a broad market investment such as the S&P 500.

This was especially important because I regard invested capital as part of my retirement savings. Returns earned in earlier years can have a significant effect on the amount accumulated over the long term. I therefore wanted the project’s financial potential to justify committing the money, in addition to supporting my immigration goals.

Equity offered a higher potential return, but it also placed me behind senior lenders if the project failed. The decision came down to whether I believed that additional return compensated me adequately for the additional risk.

After reviewing Kolter’s experience, the project details, and the developer’s history, I considered the likelihood of failure low enough to accept the equity position. That does not eliminate the risk, and equity would fare worse than senior debt in a serious downside scenario. But based on my analysis, I was willing to accept that possibility in exchange for the higher return potential.

Another investor could reasonably reach the opposite conclusion. Someone focused primarily on capital protection may prefer the senior loan. My priorities, time horizon, and assessment of the project led me to equity.

My Experience With EB5AN

My direct conversations with EB5AN confirmed what I had seen in my independent research.

I came to my calls with long lists of questions, including detailed questions about the projects. The partner I spoke with could answer them during the conversation. I did not repeatedly hear, “Let me get back to you.” Instead, I received specific figures, facts, and explanations of what had happened in past projects and where the current offerings stood.

That depth of knowledge was another form of risk reduction for me. It showed that the person discussing the investment understood the details rather than relying on a sales presentation.

Although I work in software and am familiar with tools such as ChatGPT and Claude, I did not use artificial intelligence to replace my project diligence. The decision was too important, and I am too detail-oriented, to depend on generated summaries. I read the source documents myself.

My application has now been filed. Based on the professionalism, knowledge, and experience I encountered, I would recommend both my immigration attorney and EB5AN to other investors. Most importantly, I am more comfortable knowing that I chose EB5AN after a process designed to uncover risks rather than overlook them.

My Advice to Prospective EB-5 Investors

Before comparing projects, be honest with yourself about what you want from EB-5 and which risks matter most to you.

Ask what would make you lose sleep. Is it remaining dependent on an employer? Is it uncertainty about job creation? Is it the possibility of losing capital? Is it accepting a low return while your money remains invested? Different answers can lead reasonable investors to different attorneys, regional centers, projects, and investment structures.

Then do enough research to address those concerns directly. Read the available materials. Question the assumptions. Look for negative information as deliberately as you look for positive information. Speak with professionals who can answer detailed questions about your individual circumstances, and make sure you understand both the immigration strategy and the financial tradeoffs.

That is the approach that took me from an employer-dependent EB-2 process to an independent EB-5 strategy—and ultimately to the Brandon Multifamily Equity Project. No investment is without risk. But a decision grounded in clear priorities, source documents, and careful comparison can give you confidence that the risk you accepted was considered rather than accidental.