Not automatically. Immigration sustainment requirements and contractual exit rights are different matters, and the business must also have the practical ability to make a payment. Review all three before assuming capital is available.
Ask for a case-specific assessment
Give counsel the petition dates, residence history and proposed distribution terms. Have an independent financial professional examine the contractual mechanism and commercial exposure. A project’s target term does not guarantee repayment, while a residence milestone does not rewrite the agreement.
Preserve any refinancing or extension notice that changes the expected path before making household commitments based on a distribution. Limits are worth stating plainly here. Immigration rules govern how long capital must remain at risk; they do not create a right to be paid when that period ends, and they do not override a subscription agreement’s restrictions on withdrawal.
Equally, a contractual maturity date does not shorten a sustainment requirement. Hypothetical example: An investor whose funds went into an agricultural drone services facility assumes that removing conditions frees the capital, when the enterprise has redeployed it into a second phase under powers the operating agreement always contained. Ask counsel which rules apply to your own filing, since the applicable framework depends on when and how the case was filed.
A guaranteed return sits outside the category altogether: an arrangement promising repayment whatever the outcome is inconsistent with capital genuinely at risk.