That depends on the actual terms of both transactions. Some structures may allow a proposed investment to be assessed while a sale is still completing, but the sequencing needs review rather than an assumption that one must fully close before the other can proceed.
Coordinate both transactions instead of assuming a fixed order
Identify the closing conditions for the farm sale and the funding requirements for the E-2 investment, then have both reviewed together so the timeline reflects what is actually required rather than a generic assumption. Changes to either transaction should prompt a fresh look at how they fit together.
Coordinate both closings through a conditions chart rather than assuming the farm transaction must finish first. Mark when sale proceeds become legally available, when each U.S. payment becomes nonrefundable or otherwise irrevocably committed, and which contingencies require review. Investment may still be underway at filing. Moreover, a new enterprise may qualify before opening if the evidence shows it will become real and active, so existing operations are not mandatory at application. Still, loose intentions or revocable account balances are insufficient. Sequence ownership and control documents with the funding path, and remember E-2 offers no direct route to permanent residence. The common mistake is accelerating one contract without understanding how its withdrawal terms affect at-risk capital.
Hypothetical example: A tile-drainage contractor near Strathroy-Caradoc agrees to sell his Canadian business while negotiating a U.S. drainage-services launch. A holdback delays part of the proceeds, so he matches available funds to signed equipment and premises commitments and reviews the remaining conditions. Projections support future activity without pretending crews are operating. He keeps long-term residence planning separate from the temporary E-2 transaction rather than treating business purchase timing as a green-card step.