No. The official program describes a processing fee, vetting and a gift, after which the applicant proceeds through EB-1 or EB-2 subject to those categories' own requirements, admissibility and visa availability. It is not a conventional visa category and payment alone does not produce residence.
Payment opens a process; it does not close one
Hypothetical example: a Mission rigging-company owner has been told the program is a residence card for a fixed price. The official framework, as it stood on September 7, 2026, is narrower than that. The applicant pays a nonrefundable processing fee, is vetted, and after successful vetting makes a gift to the Department of Commerce for deposit in a separate U.S.
Treasury fund; the gift is treated as evidence for the applicable EB-1 or EB-2 basis, while remaining eligibility, admissibility and visa-availability requirements still apply. Someone with a criminal record that renders them inadmissible, or who cannot meet the category's standard, is not rescued by the gift. The gift is also not an EB-5 investment: there is no enterprise, no job-creation requirement and no return of capital.
He should treat the program as a fee-bearing path to an existing immigrant category and have the underlying eligibility assessed before spending anything. Hypothetical example: A commercial-restoration contractor hears that a company can pay once and select any employee later. The first review should identify the actual applicant, the sponsor's role and the official payment sequence.
The payment is made by the applicant to the U.S. government; it is not an employer-purchased conventional visa. Keep the official program terms, proof of identity and vetting materials together, and do not assume company sponsorship changes who must clear eligibility review.
The critical decision is whether the named individual, not merely the business, is prepared to complete the required process and make the gift payment after successful vetting.