Start with the GOLD CARD eligibility and application overview
Separate the provider’s terms and official payments
Processing costs US$15,000 per person and is nonrefundable. After vetting and when instructed, the gift to the United States is US$1 million for an individual applicant or US$2 million for a corporate sponsor. Gold Card uses existing EB-1 or EB-2 classifications rather than creating a separate statutory category and must not be conflated with EB-5. A private service guarantee cannot change official payment terms. Re-verify the current official terms before any money moves. Put each proposed payment in a ledger identifying the payer, recipient, amount, purpose, refund rule and instruction authorizing it. A private adviser’s invoice is not a gift payment, and an assurance from that adviser cannot transform its own remedy into a government obligation. The applicant should wait for the applicable official instruction rather than improvise an intermediary arrangement.
Keep family eligibility and corporate conditions intact
Each eligible included spouse or unmarried child under 21 adds US$1 million and US$15,000 processing, including corporate cases; assess applicable CSPA issues individually. Corporate terms include 1% annual and 5% transfer charges with additional conditions and new vetting where applicable. EB-1/EB-2 eligibility, admissibility and visa availability remain required. Gifts are not EB-5 capital or equity, and approval, timing and citizenship are not guaranteed. The eligibility review should identify the evidence for the relevant EB-1 or EB-2 basis, any required labour certification or waiver analysis, and the applicant’s visa-availability position. Payment does not replace those elements and a Gold Card gift is neither a conventional visa fee nor EB-5 capital. Hypothetical example: a Canton de Hatley sound-restoration engineer receives a consultant’s offer to “reserve” Gold Card processing by wiring money to the consultant. Her first decision is whether her engineering degree, experience and proposed US work could support the claimed EB-2 basis; no payment fixes a missing immigrant classification. If the eligibility record is viable, she must then distinguish the consultant’s service fee from the applicant’s own instructed payment to the U.S. government. A written refund promise may govern the consultant’s fee, but it cannot refund an official nonrefundable charge, create visa availability or guarantee residence, timing or citizenship.
Corporate sponsorship is not a job-creation programme
Any approach that describes the programme in terms borrowed from other categories — an investment, a job-creation requirement, a return on capital — is describing something the official framework does not say. The official process describes the applicant making a gift after vetting and on instruction from the authorities, and the applicant must still document identity, background and the funds involved. When instructions conflict, independently access the official portal and the government contact route identified in verified correspondence. The program's terms, fees and procedures may be adjusted, and the operative version is whatever the official government source says at the moment of the decision. The official FAQ describes successful applicants receiving lawful permanent resident status through EB-1 or EB-2 as appropriately determined, subject to availability. The 5% figure attaches to use of the transfer mechanism, and the 1% annual maintenance applies to corporate sponsorship; neither is an ordinary initial fee. A company may reuse a prior US$2 million gift to sponsor another employee, subject to fresh vetting and the transfer requirements then in force, and the Executive Order process involves the prior holder abandoning status. Where a message quotes no reference number, or quotes one that does not match the others, treat it as unverified until the official channel confirms it — those fields are what separate an authentic notice from an imitation.
Sources reviewed 2026-09-07. This guide covers a preparation focus; it is not an individual eligibility assessment.