Trump’s Platinum Card Access: $5 Million For U.S. Residency

Man in suit raising fist near parked car.

As Washington quietly builds a multimillion‑dollar “Gold Card” for global elites, many Americans are asking whether U.S. residency is becoming just another luxury subscription.

Story Snapshot

A new Trump-era “Gold Card” program would grant fast‑track U.S. residency in exchange for a $1–2 million non‑refundable “gift” to the federal government, plus high fees.
Marketing around a Trump “Gold Card” and “Platinum Card” pitches $1 million and $5 million tiers to ultra‑rich foreigners seeking residency and tax advantages.
Unlike the older EB‑5 investor visa, this model focuses on direct payments to the U.S. Treasury, not job‑creating investments in American communities.
A draft USCIS Form I‑140G and a December 18, 2025 target launch date show the regulatory Gold Card track is moving toward reality.

How the Trump Gold Card Turns Residency into a High-Dollar “Gift” Program

The emerging Gold Card framework takes an idea Americans have heard about in other countries—“golden visas” for the wealthy—and gives it a distinctly U.S. twist built around direct revenue for Washington. Under the regulatory track, certain foreign nationals could obtain permanent residency by making a non‑refundable “gift” of roughly $1–2 million to the federal government, then paying a $15,000 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services processing fee, while still qualifying under the existing EB‑1 or EB‑2 National Interest Waiver employment‑based categories.

Because officials are not asking Congress to create a brand‑new visa, the program leans on broad executive discretion inside EB‑1 and EB‑2. The large “gift” is cast as evidence that the applicant brings “extraordinary ability” or “national benefit,” rather than as the legal basis for a standalone category. That maneuver lets the administration move ahead using agency guidance, forms, and fee rules, so long as the Office of Management and Budget signs off on the new I‑140G filing process.

Gold, Platinum, and the Optics of an America “for Sale”

Outside the regulatory filings, a parallel Trump‑branded marketing effort uses familiar luxury language to sell the concept to ultra‑high‑net‑worth clients. A “Trump Gold Card” tier promises residency “in record time” after DHS vetting and a $1 million contribution, while a higher “Platinum Card” tier has been promoted at $5 million, with the hook of allowing up to 270 days a year in the United States without U.S. tax on non‑U.S. income. The structure looks more like a premium credit card than a traditional visa.

Investment‑migration advisers have also circulated a separate “Trump Gold Card Visa” pitch at a $5 million price point, describing a streamlined cash‑for‑residency route distinct from EB‑5’s job‑creation requirements. Across these versions, the through‑line is clear: direct, non‑refundable payments to the U.S. Treasury in exchange for residency access and, at the top tier, tailored tax advantages. For Americans who spent years watching globalist schemes and loopholes benefit the already powerful, the optics of tiered residency packages will feel uncomfortably close to putting the country itself on the auction block.

From EB‑5 to Gold Card: What’s New and What Conservatives Should Watch

For decades, the closest U.S. precedent has been the EB‑5 investor visa, born in 1990 and recently priced at a minimum of $800,000 for investments tied to job creation. That program, while flawed, at least required capital to flow into American projects and support at least ten jobs. By contrast, the Gold Card concept moves away from the idea of building businesses and toward simple state‑revenue extraction—Washington takes the “gift,” and the main promised return is a residency document and, in some tiers, friendlier tax positioning.

Compared with the Biden‑era chaos many conservatives remember—endless spending, open‑border policies, and “equity” bureaucracies—this model does not expand illegal immigration, and it could raise non‑tax revenue. Still, it risks deepening a two‑track system: strict enforcement and long lines for ordinary families, versus a bespoke fast‑lane for billionaires who can wire seven figures. That class‑based split will trouble anyone who believes in equal treatment under law, not special rules for the well‑connected.

Executive Power, Crypto Money, and the Risk of Permanent Creep

The regulatory Gold Card design shows how much power has drifted to executive agencies over the years. By anchoring the program in EB‑1 and EB‑2, the administration can roll out an entirely new high‑dollar pathway largely through forms, guidance, and internal training, with Congress mostly reacting after the fact. Draft plans even contemplate accepting crypto payments, as long as funds are traceable through regulated exchanges and blockchain analytics—adding a complex layer of anti‑money‑laundering review to already‑strained vetting systems.

If the Gold Card proves lucrative, future administrations of any party may be tempted to keep or expand it, even if they posture against “selling visas” on the campaign trail. Around the world, similar golden visa schemes have drawn scrutiny for money‑laundering, security risks, and perceptions that citizenship and residency are simply commodities. For constitutional conservatives wary of government mission creep and elite carve‑outs, the key challenge will be ensuring that any wealth‑linked programs truly serve America’s long‑term national interest rather than just padding federal coffers and global consultants’ fees.