In a surprising announcement last week, President Donald Trump introduced a new immigration initiative intended to attract wealthy foreign nationals to the United States. Dubbed the ‘gold card’ plan, it proposes to grant citizenship opportunities to investors willing to pay a fee of $5 million. This proposal has drawn mixed reactions, highlighting ongoing debates around immigration policies and the role of wealth in determining who gains permanent residency in the U.S.
Trump’s comments came during an Oval Office briefing where he stated, “I think it’s going to be very treasured. I think it’s going to do very well. And we’re going to start selling, hopefully, in about two weeks.” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick echoed Trump’s optimism, asserting that this initiative could potentially generate $1 trillion to help reduce the national debt. The plan aims to replace the existing EB-5 visa program, which allows foreign investors to obtain visas by financing U.S. projects that create jobs.
However, immigration experts have raised concerns about the feasibility of the ‘gold card’ proposal. They argue that the President lacks the legal authority to unilaterally create a new visa category, emphasizing that significant alterations to immigration law require Congressional approval. Sharvari Dalal-Dheini, senior director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, highlighted that “Congress would have to legislate a new program,” a point reinforced by immigration lawyer Charles Kuck, who noted, “The Trump administration has literally no legal power to create a visa category.”
Critics of the ‘gold card’ argue that it echoes the Trump administration’s previous attempts to link wealth with immigration privileges. During his first term, Trump sought to redefine legal immigration by implementing a stringent ‘public charge’ rule, which penalized those relying on public assistance in their green card applications. This measure was viewed as an unjust “wealth test” and was ultimately repealed by the Biden administration.
Members of Congress would have to engage in legislative action to modify or eliminate the EB-5 program, which was established by Congress in 1990. Currently, the EB-5 program restricts the number of visas awarded annually to around 10,000. Any major changes under the golden visa initiative would necessitate navigating the complex legislative process, potentially complicating the transition from the existing structure to the proposed program.
Furthermore, immigration experts have raised alarms about the potential consequences for thousands of investors already in the pipeline for EB-5 visas. There has been no official communication regarding how these applicants might be affected, which further adds to the uncertainty surrounding the proposal. Dalal-Dheini pointed out that many have already invested their funds as they await approval, and abruptly changing the parameters could undermine their investments and long-term plans.
Trump’s ‘gold card’ concept has also elicited concerns about attracting individuals with nefarious intentions who are able to buy citizenship. Critics warn that allowing citizenship to individuals merely based on wealth may open the door for corrupt actors. Transparency International’s CEO, Maíra Martini, expressed fears about the implications of selling U.S. citizenship to the highest bidder, suggesting that it could create avenues for those seeking to hide illicit assets.
In this complicated political landscape, Trump’s proposal has sparked a broader discussion regarding U.S. immigration reform and economic contributions by immigrants. While Trump’s plan may garner support from certain factions who favor innovative economic strategies, it continues to come under fire from those advocating for a more merit-based immigration system. Observers note that the ongoing conversation serves to highlight the significant contributions that immigrants make to the American economy, especially in entrepreneurship and innovation, regardless of the future of the ‘gold card’ proposal.