The Future of EB-5 and the Trump ‘Gold Card’ Visa: A Paradigm Shift in U.S. Investment Immigration

President Trump’s recent announcement regarding the potential termination of the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program and its replacement with a new initiative— the ‘Trump Gold Card’— has sent ripples through the global investment migration industry. This significant policy shift aims to attract high-net-worth individuals by offering permanent residency in exchange for a substantial $5 million investment. However, the proposed transition raises legal, economic, and political questions, especially regarding the viability of such a program and its implications for investors, businesses, and the U.S. economy.

The EB-5 Program: A Legacy Under Threat

For over 35 years, the EB-5 visa program has provided foreign investors with a pathway to U.S. residency, contingent upon an investment of at least $800,000 in a qualifying U.S. business that creates or preserves ten full-time jobs for American workers. The program has played a vital role in economic development, particularly through its Regional Center model, which has driven billions in foreign capital into infrastructure, commercial real estate, and job creation.

However, the program has also faced scrutiny. Critics, including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, have argued that EB-5 has been marred by fraud, mismanagement, and its relatively low financial threshold for investors. With President Trump’s proposed alternative, the landscape of U.S. investment migration could change dramatically.

The ‘Trump Gold Card’ Visa: A High-Stakes Alternative

President Trump has positioned the ‘Gold Card’ as a premium alternative to the existing EB-5 program. Key highlights of the new visa include:

Higher Investment Requirement: At $5 million, the investment threshold is significantly higher than EB-5’s $800,000 minimum, pricing out many mid-level investors and shifting the focus to ultra-high-net-worth individuals.
Pathway to Citizenship: Similar to the EB-5, the Gold Card will offer permanent residency with a route to naturalization.
Job Creation and Economic Contribution: While details remain scarce, the new program is expected to maintain job creation requirements, ensuring tangible benefits to the U.S. economy.
Strict Vetting Process: The administration has emphasized rigorous background checks to attract “world-class, global citizens.”

Despite these promises, key questions remain about the feasibility and implementation of this ambitious program.

Legislative and Legal Hurdles

The EB-5 program was established by legislation, meaning that it can only be modified or abolished through new laws. Legislative changes require approval from both the House of Representatives and the Senate, with a 60-vote majority in the Senate needed to pass immigration-related bills. Currently, the President’s party holds a slim majority in the House and a narrow lead in the Senate.

While it may be possible for Congress to attempt to pass the Gold Card legislation through reconciliation (a process that only requires a 50-vote majority), this would likely face significant challenges in both the Senate and House.

In practice the President cannot unilaterally end the EB-5 program via executive action, though he could suspend the program on national security grounds, as was done during the covid pandemic. Any suspension of the program would likely prompt legal challenges from Regional centers and investors awaiting visa decisions.

Similarly, the President cannot create a new Gold Card visa program through executive orders; this requires legislative action and would require passing the Senate with a 60-vote majority.

Economic and Industry Implications

The shift from EB-5 to the Gold Card visa carries profound implications:

1.Investor Demand and Market Response: The significant increase in the required investment amount could deter many potential investors, particularly from emerging markets where $5 million is a substantial barrier. This could lead to a decline in overall investment immigration interest in the U.S.

2. Impact on Regional Centers: If EB-5 is eliminated, the well-established network of Regional Centers, which facilitates a significant portion of EB-5 investments, would face an existential crisis. These entities have been instrumental in financing major infrastructure and real estate projects.

3. Comparison with Global Investment Programs: At $5 million, the Gold Card program would be one of the most expensive investment migration programs in the world. For comparison:

Portugal’s Golden Visa requires an investment starting at approximately $500,000. – put Euro
The U.K.’s Investor Visa (before its suspension) required a £2 million investment.
Australia’s Significant Investor Visa requires AUD 5 million but allows diversified investments in managed funds.

The U.S. would have to ensure that its offering remains competitive in terms of processing time, residency benefits, and investment flexibility.

4. Legal and Practical Uncertainty: Without clear legislative backing, investors may be hesitant to commit funds to a program that could face political roadblocks or legal reversals.

Next Steps for Investors

Given the uncertainty surrounding EB-5 and the proposed Gold Card visa, potential investors should act strategically:

Fast-Track EB-5 Applications: Investors interested in the EB-5 program should consider filing their petitions before September 30, 2026, to be grandfathered under the current rules.
Monitor Legislative Developments: Since the Gold Card program has not been officially passed into law, investors should wait for concrete details before committing.
Diversify Investment Migration Strategies: Given the evolving landscape, investors may explore alternative residency and citizenship-by-investment programs in jurisdictions such as Portugal, Canada, or Australia.

The potential replacement of the EB-5 visa with the Trump Gold Card represents a major shift in U.S. investment migration policy. While the initiative aims to attract ultra-wealthy investors, its feasibility remains uncertain due to legislative hurdles and economic concerns. As the situation unfolds, investors and industry professionals must stay informed and prepared for any regulatory changes that could redefine the landscape of investment migration in the U.S.