Follow the actual programme instructions rather than invent a charge or credit from the document change alone.
Separate document costs from official programme payments
Published processing is US$15,000 nonrefundable per person, with the instructed post-vetting gift of US$1 million individually or US$2 million for a corporate principal, plus applicable family amounts. A passport-provider invoice does not itself establish a new government payment obligation or refund.
Build a payment schedule from official prompts, not from the passport invoice. The current programme starts with an online application accompanied by a nonrefundable US$15,000 DHS processing fee. USCIS later requests Form I-140G, the Gold Card immigrant petition, and the case uses EB-1 or EB-2 classification. Only once vetting succeeds do officials seek the individual US$1 million gift for the United States. It is a gift, not capital invested under EB-5, so it should not be booked as a recoverable project asset. A document-renewal charge neither creates another programme payment nor earns a credit. Re-verify the official payment directions, recipient, and case status immediately before moving any money.
Hypothetical example: A construction-company owner near Saint-David-de-Falardeau pays for expedited passport replacement and sees an unofficial worksheet combining every expense. She should keep the passport charge separate from the DHS processing payment and later requested gift, retaining receipts for each. Sending the gift with the initial application, or labelling it an EB-5 contribution, would contradict the published sequence and misstate what the payment represents.