In September 2025, the Trump administration unveiled a bold and controversial proposal to create a new pathway to U.S. permanent residency—one that centers not on skills or jobs created, but on wealth. The initiative, known as the “Trump Gold Card,” aims to offer foreign nationals the opportunity to obtain a green card in exchange for a $1 million “gift” to the U.S. government. If the gift comes from a sponsoring business entity, the amount rises to $2 million.
Promoted as a streamlined alternative to existing employment-based and investment immigration routes, the Gold Card has sparked widespread debate—raising questions around legality, fairness, feasibility, and its implications for the future of the U.S. immigration system.
Here’s what we know so far.
What is the Trump Gold Card?
The Gold Card is not a new visa category in name, but rather a new immigration pathway proposed through an executive order signed on September 19, 2025. According to the White House, the program would allow eligible foreign nationals to receive an immigrant visa—commonly known as a green card—after making a voluntary, unrestricted contribution of $1 million to the federal government. When the contribution is made on the applicant’s behalf by a corporation, the amount must be $2 million.
The contribution is not classified as a “filing fee” or “investment,” but rather a “gift” to the United States, with the funds directed to a dedicated government fund to promote U.S. commerce, infrastructure, and development.
In return, recipients of the Gold Card would benefit from expedited processing, potentially gaining permanent residency faster than through traditional employment-based or investment immigration programs.
Not a new visa—but a repurposing of existing ones
Perhaps the most unusual—and legally sensitive—aspect of the Trump Gold Card is that it does not create a new visa category through legislation. Instead, the administration is attempting to repurpose existing employment-based green card categories, specifically EB-1 and EB-2.
The executive order directs federal agencies to treat the $1 million gift as “evidence” of eligibility under:
- EB-1A: for individuals with extraordinary ability, and
- EB-2 NIW: for individuals whose work is in the national interest of the United States.
This essentially means the administration is attempting to substitute financial contribution for traditional eligibility criteria such as awards, publications, professional recognition, or a demonstrated record of high achievement.
Whether this reinterpretation can withstand legal scrutiny remains to be seen.
Key differences from EB-5
The Trump Gold Card proposal is frequently compared to the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program, which also offers a path to permanent residency through financial means. However, the two programs differ significantly in structure and requirements.
The EB-5 program requires a capital investment ranging from $800,000 to $1,050,000, depending on whether the investment is in a targeted employment area. This investment must be directed into a commercial enterprise and is required to create at least 10 full-time jobs for U.S. workers. EB-5 petitions undergo rigorous vetting, including extensive documentation of the lawful source of funds and detailed business planning. The visa category itself is rooted in statutory law, created and regulated by Congress.
In contrast, the Trump Gold Card would require a $1 million gift to the U.S. government for individual applicants—or $2 million if contributed by a sponsoring corporation on the applicant’s behalf. Unlike EB-5, the Gold Card does not involve an investment in a business and does not require job creation. Instead, it is structured around a non-refundable “unrestricted gift” deposited with the Department of Commerce. The proposal repurposes the existing EB-1 and EB-2 employment-based categories as the legal basis for issuing green cards under this program, treating the financial gift as sufficient evidence of “extraordinary ability” or “national interest”—a sharp departure from traditional eligibility standards. While EB-5 is grounded in legislation, the Gold Card is a purely executive initiative, with many of its procedures and safeguards still undefined.
Legal and constitutional questions
Critics argue that the Gold Card oversteps the legal authority of the executive branch. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), only Congress can create new visa categories or substantially alter existing eligibility criteria.
Attempting to redefine “extraordinary ability” or “national interest” through the lens of a financial gift could be seen as an unlawful reinterpretation of statutory language and may violate the principle of separation of powers.
Additionally, the framing of the $1 million as a “gift” rather than a fee may be a strategic workaround to avoid triggering rulemaking or fee-setting procedures—but courts could still evaluate whether the gift is, in effect, a mandatory payment and thus subject to regulation.
Observers expect that if the program proceeds, it will face litigation, likely on both statutory and constitutional grounds.
Backlog and visa cap concerns
Another major concern is how Gold Card applications would interact with existing employment-based visa caps.
Since EB-1 and EB-2 are numerically limited categories, especially for high-demand countries like India and China, critics warn that inserting high-paying applicants into those queues could displace or delay other petitioners who are already in line.
Without a special carve-out or cap exemption, this could mean longer waits for traditional applicants—and further politicization of visa allocation.
Implementation: What’s still unclear
The executive order instructs the Departments of Homeland Security, State, and Commerce to develop the actual implementation framework—but many key details remain undefined, including:
- How applications will be processed
- How payments will be accepted and verified
- What additional documentation will be required
- Whether family members are included automatically
- Whether the program will be subject to standard background and source-of-funds reviews
Until this implementation guidance is published, the Gold Card remains more vision than reality.
Who would use it?
The Gold Card is clearly aimed at ultra-high-net-worth individuals, including foreign businesspeople, investors, entrepreneurs, and corporations seeking to sponsor executive-level talent.
Supporters argue that it could be a powerful economic driver, attracting capital with minimal administrative burden. Detractors say it creates a two-tiered immigration system, where those with money can skip the line while others must meet far more rigorous standards.
Final thoughts
The Trump Gold Card proposal is one of the boldest—and most controversial—immigration policy moves in recent memory. While it’s positioned as an economic innovation, it raises deep legal, ethical, and structural questions about how we define merit and value in immigration law.
For now, the program exists as an executive framework, not yet tested in the real world. Whether it moves forward will depend not only on agency implementation, but likely on the courts—and potentially Congress—intervening in what could become one of the defining immigration policy battles of the decade.
As immigration policies continue to shift, staying organized and informed is more important than ever. 8am™ DocketWise helps immigration lawyers manage cases, track updates, and communicate seamlessly with clients.
The post The Trump Gold Card: A New $1 Million Pathway To A U.S. Green Card appeared first on Above the Law.