Core Viewpoint - The "Gold Card" visa program, introduced by President Trump, aims to attract top talent to the U.S. by requiring a one-time payment of $1 million for individuals or $2 million for each foreign employee sponsored by a company, replacing the existing EB-5 investment immigration program [1][2]. Group 1: Financial Implications - The funds raised through the "Gold Card" program are expected to go directly to the U.S. government, potentially generating significant revenue for the federal treasury [2]. - The "Gold Card" requires a donation rather than an investment, contrasting with the EB-5 program, which allows for the possibility of fund recovery if the investment project is compliant [3]. Group 2: Market Response and Practical Concerns - Industry insiders express skepticism regarding the practical implementation of the "Gold Card," leading to a cautious market response, with many potential applicants choosing to wait and see [2][3]. - Initial inquiries about the "Gold Card" have not translated into formal applications, as potential clients recognize the risks associated with the non-refundable nature of the donation [3]. Group 3: Comparison with EB-5 Program - The EB-5 program requires an investment of $800,000 that can cover the entire family, while the "Gold Card" mandates $1 million per family member, making it a more expensive option [3]. - The "Gold Card" program is federally driven, raising concerns about its continuity and execution under future administrations, unlike the EB-5 program which is established through congressional legislation [4]. Group 4: Legal Perspectives - Some legal experts view the "Gold Card" as having certain advantages, such as the potential for expedited processing without congressional approval, allowing applicants to reside and work in the U.S. while their application is pending [5]. - The requirements for proving the source of funds for the "Gold Card" may be less stringent compared to the EB-5 program, which demands extensive documentation [6].