Skip to content
TORBAY · E-2 FIELD GUIDE

What documents show a Torbay investor's start-up spending is irrevocably committed rather than refundable?

Sources checked:

THE DIRECT ANSWER

Signed leases with no visa-contingent exit, paid equipment invoices, licence and bond receipts, and executed vendor contracts; a bank balance in the company's name is not commitment.

Every dollar needs a receipt, a contract or an escrow with the right conditions

A Torbay contractor should assemble the file in the order the money moved. First, source: savings statements over a period long enough to show accumulation, and sale records for any Canadian assets sold to fund the business. Second, transfer: the wire from the personal account to the U.S. company account. Third, commitment: the commercial lease, signed and with the deposit paid; invoices and payment confirmations for vans, gauges, recovery machines and tools; receipts for state contractor licensing, insurance premiums and any surety bond; the signed contract and deposit for dispatch software; an offer letter and first payroll for the hired technician. Money still in the company account counts only if the plan shows it is committed to identified operating needs and the officer accepts that. Where the contractor prefers not to spend the full amount before the visa decision, the unspent balance can be placed in escrow with release conditioned solely on visa issuance, and that escrow agreement then becomes part of the file. Refundable deposits and cancellable orders are not commitment.

Hypothetical example: a Torbay window-restoration contractor deposits funds for a U.S. workshop but leaves the equipment order freely cancellable. The bank balance alone does not show a committed investment. The review should trace lawful source, transfer, signed obligation and proof of payment, then test whether the funds are irrevocably committed and exposed to loss if the enterprise fails. It should also connect each expenditure to a credible operating plan that will support more than the investor's household, because marginality remains a separate question.