Read the general investor planning overview
A Canadian-dollar budget and U.S.-dollar enterprise receipt may differ because of conversion rates and charges. Show actual movements and conversion evidence rather than using an old estimate as a completed contribution. Currency reconciliation supports the investment record, but it cannot establish substantiality without the business-cost and commitment analysis. Conversion is an evidentiary problem before it is an accounting one. Every figure in the capital schedule should trace to a document a reviewer can read without narration, and where it cannot, the schedule is recording a belief rather than a movement of money. Paragraphs below set out which record settles each link in the chain and what that record has to show on its face.
Preserve each conversion record
Keep the originating statement, exchange confirmation and receiving entry. Identify the dates, currencies, rate and charges actually applied. Where funds pass through an intermediary, include that step and the account owner. Do not use today’s rate to rewrite a historical payment or assume the amount authorized for transfer equals the net amount received by the enterprise.
Separate forecast and actual columns
Use estimates for unpaid future costs and actual amounts for completed transactions, labelling both clearly. Update the plan when the conversion occurs. This allows counsel to reconcile the investment evidence without mistaking a planning allowance for committed capital. Keep administration and professional payments separate so charges do not disappear into an unexplained exchange-rate adjustment.
Review any resulting funding gap
If actual receipts differ from the budget, determine which commercial commitments remain funded and what needs further action. Do not send additional money solely to match a supposed universal E-2 minimum. Counsel should assess the complete enterprise-specific investment, while appropriate financial advice addresses currency exposure. A cleaner conversion schedule improves evidence but does not guarantee the business or application outcome.
What each link in the chain must show
Bank records carry the weight here, and three attributes make them usable. The originating statement must show the account holder’s name, so ownership of the funds is visible rather than asserted. The exchange confirmation must show the date, both currencies, the rate applied and any charge deducted, since a net figure alone cannot be reconciled against a gross one. The receiving entry must show the enterprise as account holder and must match the converted amount, allowing for correspondent charges that should themselves be identifiable. Hypothetical example: a survey-research operations venture documents a transfer whose receiving entry is smaller than the sending entry, and the exchange confirmation naming the intermediary charge is what turns an apparent discrepancy into an explained one. Where an intermediary account appears, its owner needs identifying too.
Where a schedule stops being evidence
Where a line rests on an estimate, it belongs in a separate column and should be labelled as one on the face of the document. A committed-but-unpaid supplier order, a signed lease with instalments still due, and a budget allowance for equipment not yet bought are three different things, and only some of them speak to capital irrevocably committed and at risk. Amounts never converted, funds held in an arrangement permitting their return, and money still sitting in the investor’s personal account are not evidence of investment however precisely they are tabulated. A reviewer should be able to tell, line by line, whether a document stands behind the figure — and an honest schedule marks the lines where none does yet.
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.