On Friday, September 19, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order: The Gold Card. A few months earlier, the Administration revealed plans for the Gold Card during press conferences and subsequently published a website (trumpcard.gov) to collect reservations from interested applicants. See our blog post here.
Last Friday's Executive Order, however, revealed changes to the originally described Gold Card. Notably, the Administration announced plans for establishing the following options, as made clear on the website: (i) a Gold Card, which requires individual applicants to make a $1 million donation to the U.S. Treasury; (ii) a Platinum Card, which requires individual applicants to make a donation of $5 million to the U.S. Treasury; and (iii) an upcoming Corporate Card, which requires a $2 million donation to the U.S. Treasury by "a corporation or similar entity on behalf of an individual" (collectively, the "Gold Card Program").
The Executive Order requires the Departments of Commerce, Homeland Security and State to implement the Gold Card Program within 90 days and to establish eligibility for applicants to secure immigrant visas and adjustment of status benefits "using an expedited process, to the extent consistent with law and public safety and national security concern."
Given the similarity between the $1 million donation under the Gold Card Program and the $800,000 investment under the EB-5 Program (Section 203(b)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA")), various social media and messaging platforms have been incredibly active over the course of the past few days. Coupled with the simultaneously-issued Presidential Proclamation titled "Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers" on the H-1B Program requiring employers to pay $100,000 per H-1B petition (see Saul Ewing's summary here), there is much speculation about the Gold Card Program.
While the Gold Card Program has yet to be enacted, many questions remain in light of the issuance of the Executive Order.
It is important to clarify that the Executive Order does not create new visa categories as originally anticipated. Instead, it utilizes existing statutory immigrant visa preference categories under the INA. Specifically, donations under the Gold Card Program are to be treated as additional evidence of eligibility under Section 203(b)(1)(A) (EB-1 Program for extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics), Section 203(b)(2)(A) (EB-2 Program for exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business), and Section 203(b)(2)(B) (EB-2 Program for national interest waiver).
By backing into existing visa categories, there is an interesting twist whereby successful applicants for the Gold Card are anticipated to secure "lawful permanent resident status as an EB-1 or EB-2 immigrant visa" holder, while successful applicants for the Platinum Card will be eligible "to reside in the United States for up to 270 days per year without being subject to tax on non-U.S. income."
The Gold Card and the Platinum Card therefore appear to be designed to operate within Congressionally-authorized visa processes and do not, as expected, create a new visa program that was not previously approved by Congress. It is possible, however, that there will be challenges to the Gold Card Program raising questions regarding whether Congressional intent in approving the EB-1 Program and the EB-2 Program is reflected by the Executive Order.
With respect to the Gold Card, there also remains the question of applicability to individuals born in Mainland China and India. These countries account for the highest demand under the EB-1 Program and the EB-2 Program and are currently facing a multi-year waiting time for visa approval given the decades-old Congressionally-defined country caps that are applied each fiscal year under Section 202(a)(2) of the INA. Briefly, if an individual who was born in either of those countries has applied for an EB-1 visa or an EB-2 visa in the last few years, that individual is facing a multi-year wait before attaining lawful permanent residence in the United States. Therefore, if applicants for the Gold Card from Mainland China and India flood into these two existing visa categories, it would, ostensibly and critically, extend the lawful permanent residency wait times for pending applicants from those countries. As an aside, applicants from Mainland China and India also account for some of the highest demand on the H-1B Program (which is subject to the new employer fee of $100,000 per petition as we summarize here.)
For the time being, the EB-5 Program, which is not yet subject to backlog for either of these two countries (which same two countries also account for the highest demand), remains the safest course of action for lawful permanent residency purposes. That said, Section (3)(f) of the Executive Order directs officials to "[c]onsider expanding the Gold Card program to visa applicants under 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(5)," which is the statutory basis of the EB-5 Program. Also, the Secretary of Commerce noted in an interview that the Gold Card Program could replace the Diversity Visa Program.
Another point that remains unclear is whether individual applicants can include their derivatives in the donation amount; that is, does the required donation amount ($1 million for the Gold Card and $5 million for the Platinum Card) apply to only the applicant or instead apply to the applicant, as well as the applicant's spouse and any of their children under the age of 21? If the former, then a family of four would need to donate $4 million for the Gold Card and $20 million for the Platinum Card. This appears, however, not to be the intent, because with the Gold Card being tied to the EB-1 and EB-2 visa categories, derivatives would be expected to be included and the lure of receiving "expedited processing" would be attractive. This question will need to be addressed in any final action taken in codifying the Gold Card Program.
Another unclear topic relates to the vetting that would be undertaken under the Gold Card Program. Under the EB-5 Program, each applicant and, more importantly, each applicant's source of funds, undergoes an incredibly detailed forensic analysis. The EB-5 Program requires an analysis of the source of every dollar of an applicant's investment amount and of the movement of that capital to the United States. As such, it is virtually impossible for an applicant to use tainted money for investment purposes. In fact, there is one unit in the Department of Homeland Security called the Immigrant Investor Program Office ("IPO") that has officers who are trained specifically to vet applicants and their underlying capital investments. There does not appear to be any similar vetting contemplated under the Gold Card Program, though we expect that the Administration may well look to the tried and tested process of the EB-5 Program and undertake the same vetting process with respect to the funds to be donated by applicants under the Gold Card Program. The IPO would be the most logical unit to administer the Gold Card Program, given its experience in administering the EB-5 Program; however, adding the burden of administering the Gold Card Program to the IPO would likely slow down adjudications for the EB-5 Program.
Another consideration relates to the tax treatment for applicants for the Gold Card and the Platinum Card. As it stands, U.S. persons which include citizens, lawful permanent residents or individuals who have established substantial presence in the U.S. of 183 days using a weighted formula applied over a three-year lookback, even while residing in or visiting the U.S. on a temporary basis are subject to worldwide taxation on their income. Gold Card recipients would be subject to such worldwide taxation; however, it is not clear whether—and if so, under what currently existing authority—Platinum Card recipients would be exempt from such taxation. There are many wealthy foreign nationals who travel in and out of the U.S. on other temporary visa categories, and who are careful to avoid meeting what is known as the "substantial presence" test. As such, the effort by the Administration appears to be to attract such individuals to invest in the U.S. by obtaining a Platinum Card. However, how the tax exemption will be achieved without an amendment of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code or its implementing regulations remains unclear.
Ultimately, it is important to consider the Administration's intentions in proceeding with the Gold Card Program. President Trump has long spoken of his desire to focus on revisions to legal immigration and to allow for investments to reduce the national debt. It is also important to consider that there is global precedent for a two-tier program structure wherein one program focuses on a "donation platform" while another focuses on an "investment program". As we previously noted here, the EB-5 industry welcomes a two-tier program that focuses on expansive economic development coupled with the national security-focused vetting processes that the EB-5 Program requires. Based on a recent study conducted by an EB-5 industry organization, Invest in the USA, during just the short period of 2016 to 2019, the EB-5 Program created 1.7 million jobs, generated $75 billion in total investment, and contributed $184 billion to the U.S. GDP, at no cost to U.S. taxpayers. In addition, but for the EB-5 Program, hundreds of real estate developments, both in rural and urban areas of the U.S., would not have been timely completed or completed at all.
In summary, while the Executive Order represents a bold and unconventional attempt to align immigration policy with foreign donation to the U.S. Treasury, it does not create new visa categories, instead leveraging the existing visa statutory framework. Critical questions remain about the per-country visa limits, applicability for lawful permanent residency for the spouse and minor children of an applicant, vetting of the capital that comprises an applicant's donation, the tax treatment of an applicant's income, and possibility of future amendments by the current or future administrations, among others. Until those questions are answered definitively, the Saul Ewing team remains available to assist clients, and once the Gold Card Program is effective, we will be at the forefront to provide assistance to applicants seeking to leverage this option.
