President Trump’s recent proposal for a $5 million Gold Card visa has sparked considerable debate, particularly regarding its potential impact on the current EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program.
In the evening of his introductory debut on Feb. 25, 2025, he predicted that if one million investors signed up, it would translate to $5 trillion. According to their research, approximately 37 million people worldwide can afford the Gold Card. Therefore, they think selling one million should not be that difficult. The President also said there is even a potential of offering it to ten million people who would collectively donate $50 trillion to the United States government. The government would use $36 trillion (the current outstanding amount of U.S. Treasury debt) to reduce the U.S. Treasury debt to zero, with an excess of $14 trillion to be made available for other purposes.
While initial statements suggested that the Gold Card would replace the EB-5 program, subsequent discussions the day after the announcement opened the possibility of both programs coexisting. We assume that many ultra-high-net-worth individuals would have liked to become U.S. citizens but are deterred by the tax liability on the global income of U.S. citizens. Many potential EB-5 investors shy away from applying for the EB-5 for this very reason. Gold Card holders will not have to pay any tax on income outside the United States, highlighting a significant tax advantage compared to traditional green card holders and U.S. citizens.
Many potential EB-5 investors decide not to apply for it because obtaining a traditional green card requires them to live in the U.S. for at least six months out of the year, commonly referred to as the residency requirement. The announced version of the Gold Card will not carry this requirement. Additionally, although the details are still missing, we do not expect the Gold Card donation amount to be subject to the same level of scrutiny regarding the source of funds that the investment EB-5 investors have historically been subject to.
Proponents of replacing the EB-5 with the Gold Card argue that the EB-5 program is too inexpensive. By way of background, in March 2022, Congress passed the Reform and Integrity Act of 2022, mandating a minimum required investment threshold of $800,000 for Targeted Employment Area projects and $1.05 million for urban projects. They built into the current EB-5 program automatic periodic increases, through adjustments using the CPI, every five years. Should the President plan to increase investment thresholds or end the program, Congress must enact new legislation; he cannot make these changes through government rulemaking.
The potential for EB-5 is significant, perhaps even with an increased investment requirement. The demand for green cards through the EB-5 program exceeds the supply despite discouraged investors, fearful of being retrogressed, who choose not to apply. As such, we expect retrogression to hit the market sometime this year. The presidential support for eliminating per-country caps, coupled with increased quotas or their elimination, will be a significant win for the EB-5 market, thereby creating millions of new American jobs, reviving the economy, and prosperity for all involved.
The two programs serve different investor groups. That said, the Gold Card raises questions about fairness to U.S. citizens and whether it can pass through Congress, given the privileges it will grant to its holders, even though the Trump administration has already begun selling them.
Understanding the EB-5 Program
Over the years, the EB-5 program has been instrumental in funding infrastructure projects, commercial real estate developments, and job-creating enterprises across the country. It has been particularly popular among investors from China, India, Vietnam, and Latin America, who seek U.S. residency and long-term business opportunities in the country.
The Gold Card visa proposal
In contrast to the EB-5 program, which requires active investment and job creation, the proposed Gold Card visa offers a different pathway to U.S. residency—one based purely on financial contribution, i.e., donation. The proposal suggests that foreign nationals can obtain permanent residency by making a $5 million donation to the U.S. government, with no requirement to create jobs or establish a business. While early statements from the Commerce Secretary have indicated that the Gold Card could replace the EB-5 program, subsequent discussions have clarified that the two programs could coexist.
The key attraction of the Gold Card is its tax benefits—holders are reportedly exempt from U.S. taxes on global income, being taxed only on income generated within the United States. Unlike a green card holder or a standard U.S. citizen, a Gold Card holder can reside in the United States or elsewhere and generate income overseas without paying any taxes in the U.S. If this person incorporates his business in a tax haven such as the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, etc. theoretically, they could purchase goods in one country and sell them into another country, engaging in the import-export business and paying zero income tax while living in the United States. For many ultra-high-net-worth individuals, the present value of this tax benefit is many times more than $5 million. They would, therefore, gladly pay this donation, as it would be an upfront tax payment for the present value of their lifetime foreign income. Many U.S. citizens living abroad would love to own the Gold Card as it would relieve them from tax liability on their non-U.S. income for the rest of their lives. If these U.S. citizens were to choose to abandon their U.S. citizenship, the exit tax they would have to pay would be several multiples of the cost of the Gold Card.
Additionally, the lack of a residency requirement makes it particularly appealing to ultra-high-net-worth individuals who do not wish to relocate but still want the security and mobility that come with U.S. permanent residency. Many living in volatile geographies would love to have the Gold Card as a Plan B, allowing them to pack up and leave for the United States if their situation becomes more unstable.
Another potential advantage is that the process is less onerous and rigorous than the EB-5 program, which has strict anti-money laundering and compliance measures.
However, some skeptics argue that the $5 million price tag is excessive and may deter applicants, particularly given the availability of alternative citizenship-by-investment programs in other countries at lower costs. Despite this, the combination of tax incentives, flexibility, and simplified entry requirements suggests that the Gold Card could attract a different segment of investors than the EB-5 program, positioning it as a residency option for the global elite rather than an economic development tool for the United States.
Why can the EB-5 and Gold Card coexist?
The EB-5 program appeals to individuals and families willing to actively invest in the U.S. economy, meet job creation requirements, and integrate into American society. Its lower investment threshold—$800,000 in a Targeted Employment Area or $1.05 million elsewhere—makes it more accessible to a broader range of investors, particularly entrepreneurs and business-minded individuals who want a long-term presence in the U.S.
In contrast, the Gold Card, designed for ultra-high-net-worth individuals seeking a passive, tax-friendly residency option without the obligations of job creation, business operation, or even physical relocation, caters to a diverse range of individuals. Given the fundamental differences in structure, motivation, and target audience, there is little reason to believe that the Gold Card would significantly diminish interest in EB-5. If implemented correctly, the two programs could complement each other, offering distinct pathways for investors with different priorities, much like other countries maintain investment-based residency and citizenship options.
President Trump is not against legal immigration. He proposed giving green cards to all graduates of U.S. universities, even if the program they graduate from is only two years long and they can only earn an associate’s degree. Another proposal is to eliminate quotas for all EB categories, from EB-1 to EB-5, as these business-linked visas attract skilled, high-paying job-seeking immigrants who would significantly enhance the U.S. economy and standing in the world. He is, however, against illegal immigration and illegal immigrants who pose a threat to our national security and occupy unskilled positions that U.S. citizens and green card holders could have filled.
Given this backdrop of publicly stated pro-skilled force and merit-based immigration policy, it is hard to see why he would not want the EB-5 and the Gold Card programs to coexist.
Skepticism and potential issues with the Gold Card
However, the $5 million price tag has led some critics to question whether enough investors will find the program worthwhile, especially compared to other investment migration options available worldwide at significantly lower costs.
The tax exemption benefit on global income is another controversial aspect—while ordinary U.S. citizens and green card holders are subject to taxation on their worldwide earnings, Gold Card holders reportedly pay tax only on their U.S.-sourced income. This distinction raises questions of fairness and whether it would create a two-tiered system of residency that benefits only the ultra-wealthy. Additionally, there is concern that this pathway could weaken financial scrutiny compared to the EB-5 program, which has strict source-of-funds verification and compliance measures in place to prevent money laundering. If the Gold Card lacks similar safeguards, it could attract scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers wary of potential abuse.
More broadly, this program raises a fundamental question: Does it create a privileged path to citizenship with benefits that even natural-born Americans do not have? If so, it could face significant political and legal challenges as lawmakers and the public debate whether selling U.S. residency in this manner aligns with the principles of fairness and equal treatment of our country. It is unclear whether President Trump can garner full support on this issue from his party, the Republican Party.
Political and legal challenges
The Gold Card proposal is not just a policy shift—it is a potentially controversial restructuring of the U.S. immigration system that will face significant political and legal hurdles. Unlike executive action implemented through non-immigrant visa program changes, a residency-by-donation program with tax implications would likely require congressional approval, posing an immediate challenge to this initiative.
As immigration policy remains a highly contentious issue in Washington, a program perceived as citizenship for sale could face opposition from both Democrats and Republicans. While some members of the Republican Party may support the Gold Card to attract wealthy investors and boost economic growth, others, particularly those with a populist, America-first stance, could argue that it favors the ultra-rich while offering no direct benefit to American workers. Additionally, lawmakers who have historically criticized EB-5 for its potential for fraud and abuse may be even more skeptical of a program with no investment or job creation requirements.
Beyond political challenges, there are also legal and constitutional concerns. If the Gold Card offers special tax privileges not available to other green card holders and U.S. citizens, it could trigger legal challenges based on equal protection and fairness concerns. Critics may argue that it creates an elite class of naturalized residents with advantages not afforded to ordinary Americans, raising the question of whether such a program aligns with the principles of equal taxation and uniformity under U.S. law. Given these factors, its path to implementation is far from guaranteed. Even if it gains traction within the executive branch, it will likely face intense debate, revisions, and legal scrutiny before becoming a reality.
Ultimately, its fate will depend on Congress, public perception, and the legal system. If successfully implemented, it could reshape the global landscape of investment migration, offering an elite pathway to U.S. residency fundamentally different from anything seen before. However, if concerns over fairness and feasibility outweigh its benefits, it may remain just a bold—but—unrealized vision of the future.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this article are solely the views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the publisher, its employees. or its affiliates. The information found on this website is intended to be general information; it is not legal or financial advice. Specific legal or financial advice can only be given by a licensed professional with full knowledge of all the facts and circumstances of your particular situation. You should seek consultation with legal, immigration, and financial experts prior to participating in the EB-5 program Posting a question on this website does not create an attorney-client relationship. All questions you post will be available to the public; do not include confidential information in your question.
