Ownership of the property, how it was acquired and paid for, the sale itself, and the movement of proceeds into the account used for the investment. Tax filings covering the relevant years usually anchor the account.
Reconstructing thirty years on paper
A property held for decades is often the hardest source to document, precisely because it is the least controversial in real life. The file typically needs the original purchase documents or a title history showing acquisition, evidence of how the purchase was funded at the time, tax filings showing the income that serviced any mortgage, the listing and sale agreement, the statement of adjustments from closing, and bank records showing the proceeds arriving. Where records are missing, secondary evidence such as a land registry search, a lawyer's file or a lender's payout statement can fill gaps, and an explanatory statement should say plainly what could not be located and why. Silence about a gap is read less generously than an explanation of it. Documents in another language require certified English translations.
Hypothetical example: A Canadian shareholder in an artisanal-food wholesaler plans to fund an immigrant investor case from a company redemption. The records should show the original ownership, the authority approving the redemption, valuation, tax treatment, payment into the shareholder's account, and every subsequent transfer to the investment. The review is a source-and-path exercise, not a request for a single bank balance. If money moves through a spouse's account, a holding company, or currency exchange, that step needs its own document. The capital must be the investor's qualifying contribution at risk and connected to the required job-creation structure; eventual residence is conditional before later conditions are removed. Missing historic records should be addressed with reliable secondary documents and a candid explanation, not silent gaps. Draft the flow chronology first, then collect proof for each dated event.