The official page says the corporate card is issued to a corporate sponsor for one or more of the sponsor's employees, with a larger gift and separate maintenance and transfer terms. It does not say whether an owner of a professional corporation qualifies as that corporation's sponsored employee, so the current official terms must be checked before any application or payment.
Read the sponsor definition, not the headline
Hypothetical example: the dentist's corporation has retained earnings she would prefer to use rather than personal funds, and she reasons that a corporate sponsorship would let it pay. Three points need checking before that reasoning is acted on. First, the corporate route's published gift is US$2 million for the principal, double the individual amount, so the corporate path is not a saving.
Second, the official FAQ says the corporate card is issued to a sponsor for one or more of its employees and carries annual maintenance and transfer charges; it does not answer whether a sole-shareholder professional corporation may sponsor its owner as an employee. Third, the official framework treats the gift as evidence within EB-1 or EB-2, while the agencies must still determine the classification, admissibility and visa availability. If the current official terms do not clearly permit her corporation to sponsor her, she should not send money on that assumption.