Unpacking Trump’s ‘Gold Card’ Proposal: What You Need to Know About Its Hidden Complexities | CNN Politics

The recent announcement from the Oval Office surprised many in the immigration field. Last week, the president, known for his tough stance on immigration, introduced a new idea to attract wealthy foreigners. He proposed a “gold card” offering a route to U.S. citizenship for a hefty investment of $5 million.

President Trump expressed optimism about this plan, stating, “I think it’s going to be very treasured… we’re going to start selling, hopefully, in about two weeks.”

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick claimed this initiative could generate $1 trillion to help reduce the national debt. It aims to replace the existing EB-5 investor visa program, which currently allows foreign investors to fund U.S. projects in exchange for visas.

However, immigration law experts warn that the “gold card” concept is more complex than it seems. The idea of providing a new visa that allows permanent residency and a path to citizenship is not something a president can unilaterally create. Previous efforts at immigration reform have hit similar roadblocks.

For instance, both Obama and Biden used executive actions to protect certain groups from deportation, but these did not grant full legal status or a pathway to citizenship. Experts argue that any new visa program must be approved by Congress, which requires a complicated legislative process.

A senior director at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, Sharvari Dalal-Dheini, emphasized that Congress would need to pass a new law to bring the “gold card” program into existence, stating, “I don’t know what legal authority you would have to just create this new program out of whole cloth.”

Critics assert that this program appears to prioritize wealth over merit, suggesting it favors the richest instead of those who may genuinely contribute to the country. Changes to or the elimination of the current EB-5 program would also require Congressional approval, as Lutnick pointed out that modifications are being considered rather than a full replacement.

The existing EB-5 program, established in 1990, allows about 10,000 investors and their families to qualify annually, requiring substantial financial contributions. New applicants must invest at least $1,050,000, or $800,000 in economically distressed areas.

Legal experts predict low likelihood that Congress would agree to end the EB-5 program in favor of the gold card. Kuck, an immigration lawyer, argues that the funds raised from EB-5 investments are significantly more than what would come from a new $5 million gold card program, as the wealthy often resist U.S. taxation.

Additionally, there are concerns about existing EB-5 applicants who are currently awaiting decisions. The impact of the new proposal on these individuals remains unclear, making many anxious about their investments and the lengthy process involved in gaining approval.

There’s also uncertainty regarding how the government plans to vet applicants for the gold card. Critics worry it may attract individuals with criminal backgrounds eager to exploit this pathway into the U.S.

Despite the confusion, Dalal-Dheini views this as an opportunity to advocate for increasing green card availability, emphasizing that immigrants play a crucial role in the economy. She highlights that successful entrepreneurs often begin their journeys as immigrants, a sentiment that resonates across the political spectrum.