President Donald Trump's ambitious "Gold Card" initiative, designed to attract global wealth by offering U.S. residency in "record time" for a $1 million contribution, is encountering significant headwinds. Despite initial projections of substantial revenue and a surge of wealthy applicants, the program has been hampered by delays and legal questions, casting doubt on its efficacy and appeal to the world's affluent.
Launched in December, the Gold Card program was presented as a novel investment visa aimed at generating revenue and drawing tens of thousands of millionaires and billionaires to the United States. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick had previously forecasted that the government would issue 80,000 Gold Cards, potentially raising over $100 billion. However, recent disclosures from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) paint a far less robust picture. According to a legal filing, only 338 individuals have submitted requests for a Gold Card to date, with just 165 having proceeded to pay the required $15,000 visa processing fee.
One of the primary attractions of the Gold Card program was its promise of expedited visa processing, with the official website touting residency in "record time" and "a matter of weeks." This key selling point has been directly contradicted by the DHS's recent court filing. The department stated that Gold Card applicants will not receive preferential treatment or faster adjudication times compared to those applying for traditional visas. "Gold Card applicants will not necessarily have their petitions adjudicated faster than any non-Gold-Card applicant," the DHS filing clarified, undermining a core component of the program's appeal.
Craig Becker, managing counsel for the Affirmative Litigation Democracy Defenders Fund, which is involved in litigation challenging the Gold Card's legality, suggested that this contradiction arises from the program's uncertain legal foundation. He noted that to generate interest, the White House emphasized a fast-track process. However, in its legal defense against a lawsuit alleging that the Gold Card program displaces applicants for existing EB-1 and EB-2 visa categories, the DHS argued that Gold Card applicants do not receive priority or special consideration. "We just don't know what the real answer is because there is no transparency," Becker commented on the conflicting statements.
Immigration attorneys familiar with investment visa programs indicate that the Gold Card is still in its nascent stages and might gain traction if it secures congressional approval and establishes a consistent record of successful applications. Nevertheless, the recent court filing represents the latest hurdle for a program intended to capitalize on the growing demand for investment visas among the global elite. The number of millionaires expected to relocate internationally in 2026 is projected to reach 165,000, according to Henley & Partners, driven by factors such as geopolitical instability, increased taxes on high-net-worth individuals, and political discord in various regions.
America continues to be a desirable destination for the world's wealthiest individuals. However, the existing EB-5 investment visa program, a common pathway for such individuals, is often plagued by lengthy waiting lists and processing backlogs. President Trump's Gold Card initiative was conceived as a method to leverage this demand by creating a new avenue for residency, requiring a $1 million nonrefundable contribution to the government. As immigration law is exclusively within the purview of Congress, the Gold Card was established via executive order, utilizing the existing EB-1 and EB-2 visa categories, which are designated for individuals with extraordinary abilities or those whose work is deemed to be of national interest.
A lawsuit filed by the American Association of University Professors contends that the Gold Card program is unlawful. The plaintiffs argue that since Congress imposes annual limits on the number of EB-1 and EB-2 visas, the Gold Card initiative will inevitably lead to the displacement of qualified applicants who meet the merit-based criteria for these existing programs, potentially preventing them from obtaining visas. "The program is clearly unlawful," stated Becker, highlighting the legal opposition.
In its defense, the DHS has asserted that the Gold Card program does not negatively impact EB-1 and EB-2 applicants. The department maintains that there is an ample supply of visas available and that the Gold Card program operates with its own dedicated staff for processing, thus not affecting the quotas for other categories. This assertion aims to counter the claims of visa displacement and overcrowding within the existing immigration pathways.
The ongoing legal battle is a significant factor contributing to the wariness among wealthy international investors regarding the Gold Card program. Immigration lawyers specializing in investment visas report that their high-net-worth clientele are hesitant to commit $1 million until the program's legal standing is resolved through court decisions or explicit congressional endorsement. The ambiguity surrounding processing times further exacerbates this skepticism, according to these legal professionals.
Reaz Jafri, CEO of Dasein Advisors, a New York-based immigration consultancy, commented on the program's prospects. "Without expedited processing, the Gold Card is unlikely to be attractive to individuals from countries with backlogs," he stated. "With expedited processing, it would have been very attractive to all and a game changer." This sentiment underscores the critical role that speed and efficiency play in attracting investment visa applicants, particularly those from regions facing lengthy bureaucratic delays.
Attorneys suggest that the difficulties surrounding the Gold Card program have inadvertently increased interest in the established EB-5 investment visa program. The EB-5 program, which requires an investment of $800,000 to $1 million that must create at least 10 full-time jobs, has reportedly seen a rise in applications. This trend indicates a preference among some wealthy individuals for more tested and legally secure investment pathways, even if they involve different requirements and timelines.
David Lesperance of Lesperance & Associates offered further perspective on the options available to international businesspeople. "International businesspeople can already access the U.S. through nonimmigrant visas that do not automatically expose their global wealth to U.S. tax," he explained. "Those who are willing to become taxpayers can already gain green card status through the EB-5 program, which requires an investment rather than the donation." This highlights that alternative routes to U.S. residency and investment exist, potentially offering more clarity and predictability than the nascent Gold Card initiative.
The program's current standing, characterized by legal challenges and a lack of transparency regarding processing times, has led to a cautious approach from potential applicants. The initial promise of rapid residency for a substantial financial contribution appears to be overshadowed by concerns about the program's legality and operational efficiency, prompting many of the world's wealthy to seek more established and predictable immigration channels.
