The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has begun implementing President Trump’s executive order announcing the Gold Card by publishing Form I-140G, the Immigrant Petition for this program. The Gold Card, first announced by President Trump in February and formalized through an Executive Order issued in September 2025, has quickly become one of the most debated developments in U.S. immigration policy.
The Gold Card is not a new visa category, but rather a new immigration pathway that offers eligible foreign nationals an opportunity to obtain permanent residence based on a substantial financial contribution to the U.S. government. Under the program, an individual may qualify for an immigrant visa (green card) after making a voluntary, unrestricted $1 million contribution to the U.S. Treasury. Where a corporation sponsors a foreign national, the required contribution increases to $2 million. These contributions are characterized as a “gift” to the United States and are directed to a dedicated government fund intended to promote U.S. commerce, infrastructure, and development.
Each individual applicant must independently make the $1 million contribution. By way of example, a family of four would be required to contribute $4 million, in addition to a $15,000 processing fee per applicant, along with further fees payable to the Department of State. The Gold Card website also indicates that employer sponsors under the so-called “Trump Corporate Gold Card” will be subject to an annual 1% maintenance fee, apparently calculated on the employer’s $2 million contribution. If the employer elects to transfer the sponsorship benefit to another foreign national, a 5% transfer fee would apply. For companies sponsoring individuals from countries with substantial immigrant visa backlogs, these recurring fees could represent a significant long-term financial burden.
The executive order further directs federal agencies to treat the $1 million contribution as “evidence” of eligibility under existing immigrant categories, specifically:
• EB-1A, for individuals of extraordinary ability; and
• EB-2 with a National Interest Waiver (NIW), for individuals whose work is deemed to be in the
national interest of the United States.
These categories have traditionally been reserved for individuals who independently satisfy stringent eligibility standards through nationally or internationally recognized awards, publications, professional acclaim, or a sustained record of exceptional achievement.
At present, the USCIS has not published formal processing timelines. However, the Trump Gold Card website states that once the application and processing fee are received, adjudication “should take weeks,” subject to the applicant attending a visa interview and promptly submitting any additional requested documentation.
The Trump Gold Card vs. the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program
The Trump Gold Card is often compared to the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program, but the two differ fundamentally in structure and purpose. The EB-5 program requires a qualifying investment of $800,000 to $1,050,000, depending on the location of the project, into a commercial enterprise that must create at least ten full-time jobs for U.S. workers. EB-5 is grounded in a business model, allowing for the possibility of profit and, in some cases, the return of capital.
By contrast, the Gold Card is based entirely on a non-recoverable donation of $1 million (or $2 million for corporate sponsorship). There is no expectation of return on investment, profit, or repayment. Moreover, while EB-5 is a statutory program enacted by Congress, the Trump Gold Card effectively piggybacks on the EB-1 and EB-2 NIW categories, raising fundamental questions about its legal footing.
The Trump Platinum Card
In parallel, the Trump administration has announced a “Trump Platinum Card,” for which interested foreign nationals may join a waiting list. Once launched, this option would require a $5 million contribution to the U.S. government and a $15,000 processing fee. Platinum Card holders would be permitted to spend up to 270 days per year in the United States without being subject to U.S. taxation on non-U.S. income, in addition to paying further Department of State fees.
Visa Backlogs and Country-Specific Risks
One of the most pressing concerns surrounding the Gold Card is its interaction with existing employment-based immigrant visa caps. EB-1 and EB-2 visas are subject to strict annual numerical limits. If Gold Card applicants are placed into these same queues—or given priority within them—the result could be significant displacement of individuals already waiting under EB-1 or EB-2 NIW.
Applicants born in India, China, Mexico, or other countries prone to visa retrogression should proceed with particular caution. Even after contributing $1 million or more, such applicants could remain stuck in multi-year or even multi-decade backlogs.
What is the Way Forward?
While the executive order instructs federal agencies to implement the Trump Gold and Platinum Card frameworks, numerous critical questions remain unresolved, including:
- How applications will be adjudicated in practice?
- How Gold Card applicants will be counted against EB-1 and EB-2 NIW numerical caps?
- How USCIS will collect and process the substantial fees?
- Whether applicants must establish a lawful source and path of funds?
Last Thoughts
Supporters of the Trump Gold Card may view it as an ambitious economic innovation. However, it raises profound legal, ethical, and structural questions about how merit, contribution, and value are defined in U.S. immigration law. Marketed 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.
Legal practitioners widely expect that the Trump Gold Card will face federal court challenges, particularly because it was introduced without explicit Congressional authorization and without formal rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act. Whether the Gold Card ultimately proves to be a viable pathway—or merely a shiny but fragile concept—remains to be seen, especially for Indian nationals navigating already backlogged immigration channels.