No. A private repayment clause and the official corporate transfer terms concern different obligations. The programme describes a separate 5% transfer charge and 1% annual maintenance charge; their conditions must be read for the actual event. Do not add every possible charge as though all are initial application fees.
Compare liabilities by purpose and timing
Identify who owes the amount, to whom and when. Obtain advice on the private clause rather than assuming it is enforceable or unenforceable in every situation. Government processing fees are expressly non-refundable; other rights must be assessed under their actual terms.
Create a payment table that identifies the debtor, recipient, trigger, refund rule, and evidence for each amount. First the corporate sponsor applies online with DHS’s required US$15,000 processing payment per employee, which cannot be refunded. USCIS then prompts the corporate sponsor to file Form I-140G—“Immigrant Petition for the Gold Card Program.” Vetting follows, and a request for the corporate sponsor’s US$2 million United States gift for the employee comes only after that review, not at registration. Analyze employer repayment and corporate transfer or maintenance terms separately when an event may trigger them. Gold Card proceeds within EB-1 or EB-2 classification and is not EB-5; its gift must never be booked as an EB-5 investment. Check the latest official instructions before authorizing any payment. Adding every possible future charge to an initial invoice is the frequent budgeting mistake.
Hypothetical example: A Sherbrooke biotechnology executive’s sponsor presents one estimate combining the DHS fee, prospective gift, annual corporate charge, and a termination repayment. She should separate present government obligations from contingent private liabilities, confirm which applicant each line concerns, and seek advice on the employment clause. Neither a bundled estimate nor employer prepayment proves that USCIS has reached the stage when the gift is requested.