No. Land ownership does not affect the eligibility, admissibility, or visa-availability conditions the official framework requires. It may affect how the household raises the actual funds, which is a separate, practical question.
Keep asset value and legal eligibility as separate questions
Confirm the applicant's classification and admissibility on their own facts, independent of how much land or business value the family holds. A financial ability to eventually raise the funds does not answer whether the applicant is otherwise eligible under the framework's terms.
Land value is a funding fact, not an eligibility shortcut. The process 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 only after vetting is the US$1 million gift to the United States requested. The current framework runs through EB-1 or EB-2 classification, not EB-5; the executive order only directs officials to consider a possible future EB-5 expansion. Review classification, admissibility, identity, and liquidity separately, and re-verify official instructions before any money moves. The common mistake is assuming wealth guarantees approval or sending the gift before the government requests it.
Hypothetical example: A cash-crop partnership owner near Strathroy-Caradoc holds valuable land but limited liquid savings. Her advisers first assess the potential EB-1 or EB-2 basis and consequences of raising cash. If she proceeds, she follows the official online sequence: processing payment, settled-payment prompt for I-140G, document submission, and vetting before any requested gift. An appraisal supports private financing decisions; it does not convert acreage into classification eligibility or authorize an early transfer.