Trump Introduces “Gold Card” Visa Program for High-Net-Worth Individuals

President Trump’s announcement of a proposed “gold card” visa program, priced at $5 million, sparked immediate controversy and confusion among immigration law experts. The program, intended to allow wealthy foreigners a pathway to U.S. citizenship in exchange for a substantial financial contribution, was presented as a replacement for the existing EB-5 visa program. This program, established by Congress in 1990, grants foreign investors green cards if their investments create jobs within the United States. The central point of contention revolves around the President’s authority to unilaterally alter or replace a congressionally mandated program. Immigration lawyers vehemently argued that such a move requires legislative action, branding the President’s declaration as “blatantly illegal.” The lack of detailed information surrounding the proposed gold card program further fueled concerns, leaving experts unsure of its potential impact and practical implications. The silence from the White House in response to inquiries only deepened the ambiguity.

While President Trump touted the gold card as superior to the existing green card, offering additional privileges and a path to citizenship, specifics regarding these privileges and the associated costs for family members remained elusive. The suggestion that U.S. companies could utilize the gold card program to recruit skilled workers raised eyebrows, given the availability of existing visa programs like the H1-B visa designed for that very purpose. The administration’s rationale for abolishing the EB-5 program, labeling it as riddled with “nonsense and fraud,” was articulated by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. He stated that the $5 million generated from the gold card program would go directly to the U.S. government, ostensibly contributing to deficit reduction, rather than being tied to job creation as in the EB-5 program.

The proposed increase in the investment requirement from the EB-5 program’s threshold of $1,050,000 (or $800,000 for investments in designated development areas) to a staggering $5 million raised concerns about its practicality and potential consequences. Immigration lawyer Shereen Chen argued that such a substantial increase could significantly hinder wealthy foreigners from seeking U.S. residency. The EB-5 program already entails stringent background checks to ensure the legitimacy of funds, and a heightened financial requirement could further complicate and lengthen the application process. This change would likely disproportionately impact Chinese nationals, who are significant participants in the EB-5 program but currently face tighter restrictions on capital outflow from China. Transferring $1,050,000 is already a significant hurdle, and the proposed $5 million requirement could make it virtually impossible for many potential applicants.

The concept of attracting wealthy investors through visa or citizenship programs is not unique to the United States. Numerous countries, including St. Kitts and Nevis, operate such programs, and Henley & Partners, a consulting firm, tracks over 100 countries with similar initiatives. Approximately 30 countries even offer “golden passports” in exchange for substantial investments. However, the European Union has expressed concerns about the potential for tax evasion and money laundering associated with these programs and is pressuring its member states to phase them out.

Experts remain skeptical about the potential uptake of the proposed U.S. gold card visa. While other countries operate “golden visa” programs, their price points are significantly lower, typically below $1 million. The United States demanding $5 million, without clearly demonstrating substantial advantages over existing green cards, could deter potential applicants. Many wealthy individuals might find investor visas in countries like St. Kitts and Nevis, Canada, the United Kingdom, or Portugal, with their lower costs and fewer restrictions, more appealing.

In essence, the proposed gold card visa program represents a radical departure from the established EB-5 program. Its legal basis is uncertain, its details remain vague, and its potential impact on both immigration flows and the U.S. economy is unclear. The significant increase in the investment requirement, coupled with the lack of clear benefits beyond existing green card options, could make the program unattractive to the very individuals it aims to attract. The debate surrounding the legality and practicality of the program underscores the complex interplay between executive power, immigration policy, and economic considerations. The silence from the White House regarding the specifics of the program further contributes to the uncertainty and apprehension surrounding its future.