No. The requirement is ten full-time positions for qualifying United States workers, and the investor together with the investor's spouse, sons and daughters are excluded from that count. Employing family members is permitted; it simply does not contribute to the required number.
Recount the plan before relying on it
The correction is straightforward and best done immediately. Write out the full staffing plan, position by position, then strike through every role intended for the investor or for a spouse, son or daughter. What remains is what counts toward the requirement, and for many family-business plans the shortfall is substantial.
The response is usually to expand the hiring plan and the capital that supports it, which changes the financial model, which is why it needs to happen at the planning stage rather than after the investment is made. Where the plan cannot realistically support ten qualifying positions, that conclusion is far better reached on paper than after two years of operations. Do the position-by-position count before committing capital.
Hypothetical example: Gabriela plans to invest proceeds from the sale of a precision seed-drill patent in a U.S. commercial enterprise. A first review should produce a source-and-path chronology, identify the new commercial enterprise, and test the job-creation plan against the route's requirements.
Patent assignment records, tax filings, sale documents and bank transfers each settle a link in the capital story. Review the business plan before transferring funds, because the capital must be exposed to investment risk and the enterprise must create the required qualifying full-time jobs. Cases weaken when a lawful source is asserted but the documents do not connect it to the invested capital.