No. Qualifying investment-in-process or escrow structures can be considered on their actual terms.
Review while the meaningful terms are still clear
Identify who can change release conditions and what remains provisional. A pending purchase does not itself authorize U.S. work, and later financing or ownership changes should be assessed.
E-2 provides no direct path to permanent residence. Place each transaction on a timeline showing source receipt, account movement, contract execution, escrow release, ownership change and planned visa processing. That sequence lets the reviewer see whether the funds are already committed and whether later changes alter control or risk.
Hypothetical example: an adaptive-sports equipment buyer signs a purchase agreement, then replaces the investor with a relative after financing falls through. The amended agreement, wire records and ownership ledger determine whose capital and direction rights are being assessed. A planned opening date neither authorizes U.S.
work nor makes a retractable deal qualifying. Reassess material finance or ownership changes before relying on the original filing strategy. Before relying on the planned date, compare the latest financing and ownership documents with the original analysis.
A change that reallocates voting rights or risk may require the whole E-2 theory to be reviewed again.