Billionaires Steer Clear of Trump’s $5 Million 'Gold Card' Visa

Key Takeaways

The $5 million Gold Card visa launches March 11, 2025, offering permanent residency and citizenship pathways to ultra-wealthy investors.
Billionaire interest is low, with 75% in a Forbes poll citing tax concerns, cost, and better existing visa options.
The Gold Card replaces the EB-5 program, lacks job creation mandates, and faces skepticism over achieving $5 trillion revenue projections.

On February 25, 2025, President Donald Trump unveiled an ambitious new immigration initiative named the Gold Card visa. This program sets a $5 million price tag for wealthy foreign investors seeking permanent residency and a route to U.S. citizenship. The initiative was designed to attract high-net-worth individuals to bolster the American economy through their investments. However, early indications suggest that billionaires, the program’s primary target, are showing little enthusiasm. This cooling response raises questions about the initiative’s feasibility and long-term impact on immigration policy and economic growth.

The Billionaire Reaction: A Quiet Refusal

Billionaires Steer Clear of Trump’s Million ‘Gold Card’ Visa — Billionaires Steer Clear of Trump’s $5 Million ‘Gold Card’ Visa

A recent poll conducted by Forbes sheds light on the lackluster reception of the Gold Card visa among the billionaire demographic. The survey, which included 18 billionaires from around the globe, revealed that nearly 75% of respondents have no intention of applying for the visa. This tepid reaction poses a critical roadblock to the Trump administration’s vision of raising significant economic capital through this new program.

Among the reasons cited for their lack of interest are the steep $5 million cost of the visa, concerns about U.S. tax laws, and an unconvincing value proposition. Billionaires have also indicated that current pathways for conducting business in the United States are sufficient, eliminating the need for such an expensive entry mechanism.

What Are They Saying?

Billionaires highlighted several key reasons for opting out:

Already Adequate Access to the U.S.
Wealthy foreign nationals often leverage existing business visas and the long-standing EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program. According to several participants in the Forbes poll, these options often provide smoother paths to operating in the United States without such a steep financial requirement.
Tax Concerns
The U.S. tax laws remain a major deterrent. Notably, the U.S. exercises a global taxation policy, meaning individuals are taxed on accrued income worldwide. For global billionaires, this system does not compare favorably to the tax laws of other countries.
Patriotism and Local Investments
A notable segment of surveyed billionaires expressed loyalty to their home countries. For instance, leaders like Indian billionaire Abhay Soi emphasized their preference for reinvesting in their own nations rather than pursuing foreign residency in the United States.
Cost-Benefit Imbalance
Many compared the Gold Card’s $5 million price tag unfavorably to other existing programs. The EB-5 visa, for instance, starts at a significantly lower $800,000 investment threshold and includes stipulations for job creation that add social value alongside economic contributions.

Inside the Gold Card Visa Program

The Gold Card visa is a cornerstone of an envisioned shift in U.S. investor immigration strategy. Set to begin on March 11, 2025, the program is slated to replace the EB-5 Investor Visa Program entirely. The goal is clear: attract ultra-wealthy individuals to make substantial financial contributions. Here’s a closer look at the specifics:

Investment Requirements:
At $5 million, the new visa eclipses the EB-5 program, which requires investments ranging from $800,000 to $1.05 million. This dramatic increase underscores the program’s focus on ultra-high-net-worth individuals.
Benefits:
Gold Card holders would receive permanent U.S. residency and a streamlined path to citizenship. The Trump administration has marketed this as a premium option for elite applicants.
Potential Revenue:
According to President Trump, the framework aims to sell up to 1 million Gold Cards, which could theoretically generate $5 trillion—an ambitious figure many experts view as unrealistic.

Comparisons to Existing Programs

A direct comparison between the Gold Card and the existing EB-5 program draws attention to stark differences in scope and approach. While both programs aim to incentivize investment and economic growth, they diverge in cost structures, application requirements, and projected impact.

Key Differences:

Investment Thresholds
The Gold Card visa’s $5 million entry mark stands in sharp contrast to the substantially lower EB-5 requirements. Moreover, the EB-5 program specifically ties investment to job creation, mandating that applicants create or preserve at least 10 full-time jobs as part of their terms. The Gold Card, by contrast, lacks similar employment mandates.
Streamlined Process
While EB-5 applicants face a drawn-out application period riddled with fraud investigations and long wait times, the Gold Card is advertised as delivering a smoother, faster pathway—a point of improvement President Trump has highlighted.
Economic Philosophy
Where the EB-5 targets a broad range of investors, often supporting infrastructure projects or lower-employment regions, the Gold Card unapologetically focuses on the super-wealthy. Critics have noted potential social equity issues this tilt may invoke.

Mixed Economic Implications

For the Trump administration, the Gold Card visa represents a bold attempt to address economic concerns, including the federal deficit. However, critics and financial observers have questioned the program’s practicality, especially with its lack of uptake among the billionaire class.

Key Questions:

Will it raise $5 trillion?
Analysts cast doubt on Trump’s projection of $5 trillion in new investments. The modest interest among billionaires does not bode well for this figure, creating skepticism about the program’s capacity for meaningful economic contribution.
What about job creation?
Without job-creation requirements, some worry that the economic spillover from eligible participants may be limited compared to the EB-5 program, which directly links investments to community improvements.
Unresolved Congressional Hurdles
The plan hasn’t been without political obstacles. Lawmakers like Representative Ro Khanna have openly criticized the initiative, citing ethical questions and doubts about whether the program complies with existing immigration laws. Khanna recently questioned whether such policies, which effectively allow permanent residency to be purchased, reflect America’s core principles of fairness.

Criticism and Early Backlash

The $5 million Gold Card has also faced criticism from immigration think tanks and advocacy groups. For instance, the Cato Institute warns that the program’s high cost could limit participation to a narrow demographic, ultimately depriving lower-economy areas of the growth they’ve traditionally relied upon through EB-5 investments.

Moreover, ethical debates surrounding the sale of U.S. residency have also gained momentum. Critics argue this effectively monetizes American citizenship, creating an inequitable framework favoring only the wealthiest applicants. While reforms to U.S. immigration policy are often welcome, opponents suspect this approach could spark long-term backlash and trigger legal disputes over its eventual implementation.

Legal scholars hold that substantial revisions may trigger congressional review. As a standalone presidential order, the Gold Card program could face further legislative scrutiny before full-scale execution.

Future Considerations

As the March 11 launch date looms, whether the Trump administration adjusts the program remains unclear. Key stakeholders, from lawmakers to the wealthy immigrant population this program targets, are holding their breath. Moving forward, some reforms could include lowered costs or built-in guarantees like reduced tax burdens for Gold Card holders.

Meanwhile, potential synergies between existing EB-5 models and the new program have yet to emerge. Some legal and financial analysts argue the EB-5 framework still provides a well-balanced economic and social gain template, which the new initiative risks disrupting.

For readers desiring accurate details about available visa-related opportunities in the U.S., detailed program comparisons are available through USCIS.gov—the official U.S. immigration service. Platforms like VisaVerge.com have also spotlighted how these policies intersect with global investor migration trends in recent analysis.

Final Thoughts: Optimism or a Fading Promise?

Ultimately, President Trump’s $5 million Gold Card aims to represent ambitious economic innovation through immigration. Yet its rollout faces tepid billionaire interest, legal scrutiny, and growing public debate. Whether it can be a groundbreaking shift remains to be seen. For now, the spotlight will stay firmly on its looming success—or failure—as early applications begin streaming in.

Learn Today

Gold Card visa → A proposed U.S. residency program requiring a $5 million investment, targeting wealthy foreign investors for citizenship pathways.
EB-5 Investor Visa Program → An existing U.S. visa program requiring investments of $800,000–$1.05 million, tied to job creation and community development.
Global taxation policy → A system where individuals are taxed on their worldwide income, regardless of where the income is generated.
Permanent residency → A legal status allowing individuals to live indefinitely in a country without becoming full citizens.
Investment threshold → The minimum required financial contribution to qualify for a specific investment-related visa or program.

This Article in a Nutshell

Gold Card Visa: Wealthy Skepticism Looms

President Trump’s $5 million Gold Card visa aims to attract billionaire investors but faces a frosty reception. Many cite steep costs, global tax concerns, and existing pathways as better alternatives. Without job-creation mandates or clear benefits, skepticism grows. Can this ambitious program deliver? Early reactions cast doubt on its viability.