Identify the exact programme claim and the applicant’s actual income and residence circumstances.
Compare the proposal with the official terms
Preserve the written claim and distinguish immigration documents from tax advice. A generic marketing statement should not replace a review of the person’s real circumstances or be represented as an official government ruling.
Bring the proposal, screenshots showing its date and source, contracts behind any tax estimate, and records of the applicant’s citizenship, residences, income sources, entities, trusts, and assets. Tax counsel can test the assumptions while immigration counsel reviews the route. Document the official sequence separately. First preserve the online application and receipt for DHS’s nonrefundable US$15,000 processing charge. USCIS next invites I-140G, the form called “Immigrant Petition for the Gold Card Program.” Successful vetting must precede any request for the US$1 million United States gift. The programme uses EB-1 or EB-2 classification and is not EB-5. A slide deck cannot change those conditions or promise approval. Re-verify the official portal and instructions before transmitting funds.
Hypothetical example: A software-company founder around Petit-Saguenay is shown a memorandum claiming worldwide income will disappear from US taxation. The founder gathers the memorandum, corporate ownership charts, distribution records, prior returns, residence chronology, and the assumptions used by its author. Advisers distinguish factual tax analysis from the immigrant petition record and flag unanswered questions. The founder does not substitute marketing material for official instructions, combine the gift with an EB-5 business plan, or send money to an intermediary claiming it can bypass vetting.