Not automatically, but the applicant should confirm the actual consequence of withdrawing a pending EB-5 petition, including any effect on committed capital, before assuming the two processes can simply run in parallel or that one can be abandoned without cost.
Confirm the EB-5 case's real status before changing course
Identify the EB-5 petition's current stage, whether capital is genuinely at risk under the offering documents, and what redemption or withdrawal rights, if any, apply. Separately confirm the current Gold Card eligibility, admissibility and visa-availability requirements, and assess both on the applicant's actual documented position rather than a general comparison.
Do not withdraw an EB-5 petition merely because a second program is being explored. First identify petition status, project duties, exit terms, and consequences for at-risk capital; then assess Gold Card eligibility independently. The official sequence begins with an online application and a US$15,000 nonrefundable DHS processing fee. After payment settles, USCIS prompts Form I-140G, “Immigrant Petition for the Gold Card Program”; vetting follows, and the US$1 million gift to the United States is requested only after vetting. The program proceeds through EB-1 or EB-2 classification, never EB-5. Re-verify official instructions before money moves.
Hypothetical example: a Clarence-Rockland construction-materials importer has a pending EB-5 investment in an American project but is considering Gold Card. Counsel reviews the filed petition, subscription agreement, job-creation posture, and any exit restriction before recommending whether the older case should remain pending. The applicant makes no withdrawal based on a marketing comparison and treats the newer application as a separate eligibility inquiry. A decision chart identifies which event would create an irreversible financial consequence under each route, preventing a premature exit from destroying an existing position.