Read the general investor planning overview
Calling an account escrow says only that a third party is holding money. It says nothing about whether the investor can still get it back, and that is the question the treaty-investor rules actually ask. Read the release clause before reading anything else: who instructs the agent, on what event, and who bears the loss if the deal collapses. This worksheet walks that clause, then tests what survives it against the commitment and risk conditions.
Identify the real agreement and its stage
Distinguish a clause that has been drafted from an arrangement that has been executed and funded; a term sheet circulating between lawyers is neither. Hypothetical example: the buyer of a small Grimsby greenhouse-supply distributor has agreed a price, but the parties have not settled whether the buyer may walk away and recover the deposit if a key supply contract is not renewed. That open term decides whether the money is at risk. Do not paper over it by describing the whole sum as irrevocably committed. Describe the amount actually funded, the conditions still attached to it, and the date those conditions are expected to fall away. An unresolved withdrawal right is a fact about the investment, and concealing it damages the credibility of everything else in the account.
Assess the terms under the proper standard
An escrow tied to visa issuance can be consistent with commitment, because the only condition left is one the investor cannot control. That is a narrow allowance and not a general permission: an account the buyer may drain at will, or one released on a milestone the buyer sets, leaves the funds unspent and unexposed. Test each tranche separately rather than the agreement as a whole. For money that is genuinely released, the ordinary conditions still have to be evidenced, meaning lawful origin, a traced path from that origin into the enterprise, an amount substantial for a business of this kind, and real exposure to loss. Financing follows its own rule. Money borrowed against the assets of the business being bought is not qualifying capital, while borrowing on the investor’s own credit, or against assets outside the enterprise, is assessed on its actual terms.
Keep enterprise conditions and permission separate
Money leaving the escrow account proves one thing only: that the agent was instructed. It does not establish that the buyer is a treaty national, that nationals of that treaty country hold at least half of the enterprise, that the buyer will develop and direct the business through ownership of at least half of the enterprise or a genuine controlling role, or that the distributor is a real operating concern rather than a marginal one, able to support more than a minimal living for the buyer’s household or to make a significant economic contribution, with any future capacity realistically reached within about five years of normal trading. Nor does release authorise anyone to work. The transaction calendar and the immigration calendar are separate, Canadians need a visa issued in this category rather than visa-free admission, and an intention to depart when the status ends still applies. One financing point deserves repeating at closing, because that is where deals get restructured late: a loan secured on the assets of the business itself is excluded from qualifying capital, and pledging personal collateral alongside those assets does not rescue it. No published minimum figure closes any of these questions.
What else is on your mind?
Is there one minimum investment that guarantees E-2 eligibility?Is holding money or owning an asset enough for E-2?Editorial source review: 2026-09-07. General preparation guidance, not an individual assessment.