USCIS Updates Policy Manual for International Entrepreneur Rule

If you’ve ever tried to explain the International Entrepreneur Rule (IER) at a dinner party, you know the moment:
eyes glaze over somewhere between “parole authority” and “qualified investor.” Don’t worry. You’re not boringimmigration vocabulary
just has a gift for sounding like a sci-fi legal thriller.

The good news: USCIS has been making the IER easier to navigate by updating its Policy Manual. In late 2024, USCIS rolled out
clarifications and expanded examples of supporting evidencethe kind that helps founders turn “trust me” into “here’s the paper trail.”
If you’re a startup founder, an accelerator mentor, or the brave soul who volunteered to assemble the application binder, these updates matter.

What the International Entrepreneur Rule Actually Is (And What It Isn’t)

The IER is not a visa. It is a discretionary parole program that can allow certain international founders to be “paroled” into the United States
(or remain here, depending on circumstances) to grow a qualifying startup when USCIS determines the founder’s presence would provide a
significant public benefit. In plain English: it’s a framework for letting high-potential founders build companies that can create U.S. jobs,
revenue, and innovationwithout needing a traditional nonimmigrant visa category that may not fit early-stage startups.

USCIS evaluates these requests case-by-case, weighing the totality of evidence. That means there’s no magic wand, no “one weird trick,” and definitely
no “I watched three pitch-deck videos so I’m basically a unicorn” shortcut.

The 2024 Policy Manual Updates: What Changed and Why It Matters

Update #1: October 10, 2024 Thresholds and Biometrics Logistics

USCIS updated its Policy Manual guidance to clarify the required triennial inflation-based increases in the investment, revenue, and related thresholds
and to explain how USCIS generally arranges biometrics appointments for certain IER applicants. The revised thresholds became effective
October 1, 2024 and apply to requests filed on or after that date. The guidance also clarified that USCIS generally coordinates with the
U.S. Department of State when arranging biometrics for conditionally approved applicants who are outside the United States or who choose to
receive parole documentation at a U.S. embassy or consulate. That’s a big deal for founders building globally who may not be physically in the U.S.
when paperwork moves forward.

Update #2: December 12, 2024 “Show Your Work” Evidence Got Clearer

USCIS issued updated Policy Manual guidance on the types of evidence that may support an IER request. The update focused on:
(1) evidence of the founder’s central and active role in the startup,
(2) evidence the founder is well-positioned to substantially help the company grow,
(3) expanded evidence examples for qualified investments and qualified government awards/grants,
(4) more clarity on alternative evidence when you only partially meet the investment/grant criteria, and
(5) clarified evidence for the “significant public benefit” determination.
This guidance applied immediately and also to requests pending or filed on/after December 12, 2024.

Translation: USCIS didn’t just say “bring proof.” It offered more road signs showing what “proof” can look like. That reduces guesswork and rewards applicants
who can document reality like a CFO with a color-coded spreadsheet habit.

Core Eligibility Requirements Under the International Entrepreneur Rule

The IER eligibility framework lives in regulation and is explained in the Policy Manual. Here are the big building blocks founders typically must address.

1) You must be an “entrepreneur” in the IER sense

Under the regulation, an entrepreneur is someone who has a substantial ownership interest in a startup entity and plays a
central and active role in operationsmeaning you’re positioned by knowledge, skills, or experience to materially help the business grow.

• Ownership threshold (initial): USCIS considers at least 10% ownership substantial at the time of adjudication for the initial grant.
  During the initial parole period, the founder must maintain at least 5% ownership at all times.
• Ownership threshold (re-parole): At the time of adjudication for re-parole, USCIS considers at least 5% ownership substantial, and the founder must
  continue to maintain an ownership interest during re-parole.

2) Your startup must qualify as a “start-up entity”

The business must be a U.S. entity recently formed (generally within 5 years of filing), have lawfully done business during its period of operation,
and show substantial potential for rapid growth and job creation.

3) You must meet the funding/traction pathway (or use alternative evidence)

For an initial request, the startup typically must have receivedwithin the 18 months before filingeither:

• Qualified investment of at least $311,071 from one or more qualified investors, or
• Qualified government awards/grants totaling at least $124,429.

If you meet the entrepreneur + startup definitions but only partially meet the investment/grant criteria, you may submit
other reliable and compelling evidence showing substantial potential for rapid growth and job creation (more on that below).

4) Re-parole (an additional period) has its own performance targets

Re-parole is not just “Season 2.” It’s “Season 2, but show receipts.” To qualify, the startup typically must demonstrate at least one of the following during
the initial parole period:

• It received at least $622,142 in qualifying investments and/or qualified government grants/awards, or
• It created at least 5 qualified jobs, or
• It reached at least $622,142 in annual U.S. revenue and averaged 20% annual revenue growth.

5) The “qualified investor” definition is specific (and USCIS expects documentation)

A “qualified investor” must be a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, or a U.S.-located organization majority owned/controlled by U.S. citizens/LPRs,
with a track record of substantial startup investing and results. The regulation includes benchmarks USCIS can use to evaluate that track record:

• Over the preceding 5 years, investments in startups totaling at least $746,571; and
• At least 2 of those startups each created at least 5 qualified jobs or generated at least $622,142 in revenue with average annualized growth of at least 20%.

The point isn’t to worship spreadsheets. The point is to show the investor is real, U.S.-based, and has a credible history of backing companies that actually grow.

What USCIS’s Evidence Guidance Means in Practice

USCIS’s December 2024 guidance emphasizes something founders already know: you can’t pitch your way through a paperwork program.
You have to document your storyespecially your role, ownership, funding trail, and why your startup benefits the U.S.

Evidence Bucket #1: Ownership (Cap table therapy included)

USCIS lists examples of evidence that may show ownership interest, such as:
organizational documents (articles of incorporation/organization, bylaws, operating agreements), equity purchase or grant agreements,
equity ledger or certificates, contracts, bank records, wire transfers, and other documentation establishing ownership.

Practical takeaway: your cap table should match your legal docs. If your cap table says 12.5% but your executed equity documents say something else,
USCIS won’t “round up” because the founder seems nice.

Evidence Bucket #2: Central and Active Role (a.k.a. “Are you driving the car?”)

USCIS expects a detailed, credible description of your day-to-day role, supported by evidence such as:
an employment agreement, documentation from co-founders/HR/other employees who can attest to your role,
position descriptions, and similar materials describing what you do and how you do it.

Practical takeaway: include a role narrative that reads like reality, not a LinkedIn headline. “Visionary disruptor” is fun; “responsible for product roadmap,
customer onboarding, hiring decisions, and fundraising execution” is helpful.

Evidence Bucket #3: You’re Well-Positioned to Help the Startup Grow

USCIS distinguishes between being active in the company and being well-positioned to help it succeed. Evidence examples include:
resume/CV, letters from government agencies/qualified investors/business associations, news coverage, accelerator participation,
documentation showing success in prior startups, degrees relevant to the business, and intellectual property documents (like patents) tied to your work.

Practical takeaway: connect the dots. Don’t just attach a resumeexplain how the experience maps to what the startup is building now.

Evidence Bucket #4: Qualified Investment (Follow the moneynicely)

For the investment pathway, USCIS guidance focuses on documenting:
(1) the investor’s eligibility (U.S. citizen/LPR or qualifying U.S. organization),
(2) the investor’s track record, and
(3) the actual investment into the startup entity (not into a cousin-company, a parent, or a “future entity to be formed”).

USCIS lists examples such as equity purchase agreements, convertible debt agreements, cap tables, audited financial statements,
bank records, and wire transfersdemonstrating the trail of lawfully derived capital into the startup.

Practical takeaway: “We closed the round” is not evidence. The round documents are evidence. So are the wires. If your funding came in tranches,
show each tranche with dates and amounts. If your instrument is a SAFE or convertible note, provide the executed agreement and proof of funds received.

Evidence Bucket #5: Qualified Government Grants/Awards (Not a contract for services)

For the government grant/award pathway, USCIS highlights evidence like award letters/notices, confirmation documents showing amount and recipient,
and information demonstrating the government entity regularly provides such awards/grants to startups. The definition excludes contracts for goods/services,
so clarity here matters.

Practical takeaway: if your “grant” is really a procurement contract, call it what it isand understand it may not fit the grant/award category.
Labeling a contract a “grant” is a fast way to make an officer reach for the coffee.

Evidence Bucket #6: Alternative Evidence (When you’re close, but not quite there)

USCIS recognizes founders won’t always fit neat boxes. Alternative evidence examples may include:
number of users/customers, revenue, additional fundraising (including crowdfunding), social impact,
national scope, local/regional economic effects, accelerator/incubator selection, academic degrees tied to the business,
and prior founder success (patents, revenue, job creation, etc.). USCIS notes that evidence can vary by industry and business model.

Practical takeaway: alternative evidence works best when it’s measurable and verifiable. Think dashboards, audited statements,
signed contracts, paid invoices, user metrics with methodologynot “my mom says it’s going great.”

Evidence Bucket #7: Significant Public Benefit (The “why the U.S. should care” file)

Beyond meeting numeric thresholds, USCIS looks for evidence supporting the idea that your presence provides significant public benefit through your startup’s
potential for rapid growth and job creation. Evidence examples include letters from relevant agencies/investors/business associations, media coverage,
accelerator participation, patents/tech development, STEM or critical/emerging technology relevance, proof of job creation (tax/payroll/I-9 records),
and other reliable evidence of growth potential and your ability to advance the startup in the U.S.

Practical takeaway: Don’t assume the benefit is “obvious.” Spell it out: jobs, commercialization, productivity gains, export potential, supply-chain impact,
public health improvements, regional economic developmentwhatever applies, supported by documents.

Step-by-Step: How an IER Request Typically Comes Together

Step 1: Build the narrative (then prove it)

Start with a clear story:
what the startup does, the market problem, traction, funding, your role, and how the company can grow and create jobs in the United States.
Then make sure every key claim has backup documentation.

Step 2: File Form I-941 with supporting evidence

The initial request is made by filing Form I-941 (Application for Entrepreneur Parole) with USCIS, along with the fee and the evidence package.
USCIS evaluates eligibility and discretion under the regulation.

Step 3: Biometrics coordination (especially if you’re abroad)

After USCIS’s October 2024 guidance update, applicants should be especially mindful that USCIS generally coordinates with the Department of State
for biometrics in certain scenarios involving applicants outside the U.S. or those planning to pick up parole documentation at a U.S. embassy or consulate.
Planning ahead mattersespecially for founders juggling product launches and international travel.

Step 4: Parole grant mechanics and timing realities

If approved, the regulation allows an initial parole period of up to 30 months, and one additional re-parole period of up to 30 months
(for a maximum of 5 years total). There’s no appeal from a denial, and motions to reopen/reconsider are generally not availableso quality on the first
submission is everything.

Step 5: Compliance during parole (the “adulting” section)

Parole comes with conditions. For example, the regulation provides that a parolee must maintain household income above 400% of the federal poverty line
for their household size, and must report material changes to USCIS. Also note: the entrepreneur is authorized to work for the startup incident to parole,
and spouses may be eligible to apply for work authorization; children may not work.

Common Mistakes That Can Sink an Otherwise Strong Startup Story

1) The investment isn’t “qualified” (even if it’s real)

Money from family, founders, or entities connected to the founder doesn’t count as qualified investment under the definition.
Also, investments routed in ways that don’t clearly show a trail into the startup can create problems.

2) The investment timing window is missed

For the initial pathway, the investment or grant generally must be within the 18 months before filing. If a funding event closed earlier,
consider whether alternative evidence or other pathways are appropriate.

3) The “qualified investor” track record is assumed, not proven

USCIS expects proof of the investor’s U.S. status/structure and track record benchmarks. If you can’t document it, it might not existat least not for USCIS.

4) The founder’s role is described like marketing copy

USCIS wants operational reality. Vague titles without responsibilities, decision authority, and day-to-day activities can weaken the “central and active role” showing.

5) “Public benefit” is treated as a vibe

Public benefit needs evidence. Letters, metrics, patents, job creation records, revenue growth, and accelerator participation are all ways to make it concrete.

Specific Example Scenarios (Hypothetical, But Realistic)

Example 1: Venture-backed seed round with a qualified investor

A health-tech startup formed 2 years ago raises a seed round led by a U.S.-based VC. The founder applies under the investment pathway.
A strong package may include: cap table and executed SAFE/convertible note agreements, wire confirmations, bank statements showing receipt,
organizational documents, the investor’s evidence of U.S. ownership/control, proof of the investor’s qualifying track record,
the founder’s employment agreement and role description, and traction metrics (pilots, customer LOIs, paid contracts).

Example 2: Government award/grant-based application

A climate-tech startup receives a state innovation grant designed for early-stage R&D. The founder applies using the grant pathway.
Helpful evidence may include: the award letter, proof of funds received, documentation that the agency regularly provides such grants to startups,
a budget/use-of-funds summary, and product development milestones that demonstrate growth potential and future job creation.

Example 3: Re-parole based on revenue growth

During the initial parole period, a SaaS startup grows U.S. revenue past $622,142 and demonstrates at least 20% annualized revenue growth.
A re-parole package may include: audited financials or tax records, revenue reports with methodology, customer contracts/invoices,
payroll and hiring records (if applicable), and an updated narrative showing the founder remains central and active.

Why These Policy Manual Updates Are a Win (Even If Paperwork Still Exists)

The IER has always been evidence-heavy, but the December 2024 guidance makes the “what should I submit?” question less mysterious.
And the October 2024 update helps founders who are outside the U.S. better understand biometrics logistics and threshold timing.
More clarity means fewer avoidable RFEs, fewer mismatched assumptions, and fewer founders learning the hard way that a cap table is not the same thing as a legal record.

Bottom line: USCIS is signaling that strong applications are the ones that pair a credible startup growth story with the documentation that supports it.
If you’re building a company, you already know how to validate claims with data. Now you’re just doing it in PDF form.

Conclusion

USCIS’s late-2024 Policy Manual updates for the International Entrepreneur Rule aim to make the program more navigable by clarifying updated thresholds,
biometrics coordination for certain applicants abroad, and the kinds of evidence that can support key eligibility elements. For founders, the practical message
is straightforward: tell a specific story, then prove every major sentence. When your evidence matches your narrativeand your numbers match your documentsyou
give USCIS what it needs to say yes.

Real-World Experiences Related to the IER Updates (What Applicants Learn Along the Way)

Founders who go through an International Entrepreneur Rule filing often describe the process as “fundraising, but for permission to fundraise.” That’s not a complaintit’s a vibe check.
The IER asks you to demonstrate that you’re building something with real traction and real upside for the U.S. economy, and the policy updates in late 2024 made one thing clearer:
USCIS wants the same thing investors wantproof that the story is backed by reality.

One common experience is how quickly “simple” documents become complicated. A founder may swear their ownership percentage is obviousuntil someone realizes the cap table
includes an option pool that was expanded after the last fundraising round, or the company issued advisory shares that weren’t reflected in the draft ledger. The December 2024
evidence guidance helps by spelling out acceptable ownership proof (organizational documents, equity agreements, ledgers, bank records), but applicants still learn that
consistency is everything. The most successful teams often treat the IER package like a product launch: version control, document naming conventions, and a single source of truth.

Another repeat lesson is that “central and active role” is easier to demonstrate when a company runs like a real company. Founders who have employment agreements, board minutes,
role descriptions, and written decision authority tend to assemble stronger evidence. Early-stage startups sometimes avoid formalities to move fastthen discover that speed doesn’t
help if you can’t show who does what. The updated guidance’s examples (employment agreement, attestations from co-founders/HR, position descriptions) push startups toward
documenting leadership in a way that’s healthy even outside immigration.

Funding documentation is its own adventure. Teams regularly discover that an investor being “U.S.-based” in conversation isn’t the same as being a “qualified investor” on paper.
Applicants learn to ask for supporting documents earlyproof of U.S. citizenship/LPR status for individual investors, or governance/ownership information for organizations.
The October 2024 updates on thresholds also made some founders revisit timelines: a filing date one week later might place the case under the higher post–October 1, 2024 amounts.
In practice, founders start thinking like project managers: backward-planning for document collection, signature cycles, and wire confirmations, while also managing product deadlines.

Finally, many founders say the hardest part is writing the “public benefit” story without sounding like an infomercial. The best experiences come from being specific:
“We will hire three engineers and a customer success lead in the next 12 months,” or “Our technology reduces processing time by 40% for U.S. manufacturers,” supported by pilots,
contracts, letters, or credible third-party validation. The December 2024 guidance clarifies what kinds of evidence can support this, which encourages founders to gather
proof the way they would for a serious investor updatemetrics, milestones, and third-party credibility. In the end, applicants often leave the process with a stronger business
documentation culture. They didn’t just build an immigration filingthey built a sharper operating system for the startup.