No. The test remains a real operating enterprise, substantial capital genuinely committed and at risk, qualifying treaty nationality with at least 50% treaty ownership, an investor who genuinely develops and directs, and a business that is more than marginal. Losses are evidence bearing on that last element, not an automatic bar.
Show what actually changes under new ownership
A buyer who repeats the seller's operating model is hard to distinguish from the seller's results. Identify the specific decisions that will differ: pricing, opening hours, staffing, product mix, premises, collections or supply terms. Attach a record to each change instead of an assertion. If nobody has yet diagnosed why the business lost money, that diagnosis is the next task, and it belongs before a purchase price is agreed.
At least 50 percent of the enterprise must be owned by nationals of the treaty country, so map the cap table, holding companies and any co-investors before assuming the structure works. Where a Canadian and a U.S. citizen each hold fifty percent, the Canadian must show operational control through the operating agreement: authority over hiring, spending and strategic decisions, or a management role that gives day-to-day command.
Assess the actual substantial investment and operating enterprise; there is no universal fixed minimum.