No. Substantiality, risk, source, control and enterprise requirements still need assessment.
Avoid valuing away an evidence gap
There is no universal qualifying dollar minimum. A report cannot cure missing lawful funding evidence or an unsupported operating business.
The test compares the amount actually invested with the cost of purchasing the enterprise as a going concern, and it is applied on a sliding scale: the lower the total cost, the higher the proportion the investors should fund from their own capital. Show investment capital and operating costs separately from government fees, legal and professional service fees, and family or travel expenses, and confirm current official fees before committing to anything. Business outlays such as premises, equipment and inventory belong in the investment analysis, and professional charges deserve individual review rather than a blanket inclusion or exclusion. For a lower-priced business, a higher proportion of the price should be invested, and buying the whole sixty percent stake with the applicant's own committed funds is a strong position. The investor must demonstrate treaty nationality and an auditable funding path, with capital placed irrevocably at commercial risk, plus a real non-marginal operation directed through half ownership or equivalent operational control. Keep three budgets separate: the investment itself, which must be at risk in the business; working capital the buyer holds in reserve, which is not counted until committed; and the consular application fee, professional fees and translation costs, which are never part of the investment.