As others have pointed out, different sports have different ways of talking about themselves. There is a huge difference between a golf professional and a professional golf player. In football, a professional footballer is always a professional football player and no-one uses the phrase football professional. Some sports, like tennis and golf, regulate entry to the professional players' ranks by making players prove to the pro organisations that a minimum standard has been achieved. In other sports you only have to prove yourself to a club.
Go is a special case in many ways, and is (?surprisingly) quite unlike chess, although it could be argued that there are similarities with the old Soviet chess system. One thing that makes chess special is (again as others have mentioned) that pro is really a title. Becoming a pro requires achieving a minimum rank and a diploma. It is the equivalent of a university degree. Once you have your degree it is up to you whether you actually use it to make your living. If you don't, you still retain your diploma.
Further, the status of go players varies a little in each of the main go playing countries. As the country with the oldest organisations Japan sets the standard somewhat. In Japan, although the western term pro is widely used it is not the pukka word. That is kishi. You get some of the flavour by translating that (almost literally) as 'knight of the go board'. You get that status by having a suitable diploma, not by making your living from go. Japan differentiates a little by also having quasi-kishi and local kishi. Both require diplomas but of a lower standard (like, say, accountancy college as opposed to university). Normally these types of pro stay outside the full kishi system (e.g. local kishi have their own championships) and they are never called just kishi.
In Japan, if you earn your living 100% from go (e.g. as a writer) but do not have a kishi diploma, you are never described as a go pro. Instead, you are a professional writer, or whatever.
Korea is near enough the same. China's a bit different. There you first need to earn a 'passport', which is very like getting your 'tour card' in golf. Although getting a passport coincides with becoming 1-dan, the difference is that in the case of a passport (as with a tour card) 'use it or lose it' applies, as the point of it is that it gives you automatic access to all pro tournaments. If you do not take up your places you are expected to drop back to the amateur ranks. However, there is a fuzzy cut-off point in China which means that 'face' becomes a consideration and so those who achieve high pro grades can keep their pro status even if they no longer play in tournaments but instead undertake teaching or coaching. However, even in China a person who earned money from go without having earned a passport would never be called a pro.
So, sorry, Robert - you and I are not pros!
Europe and the USA are free to devise their own models, and now is surely the time to discuss what we want or expect. No-one seems to have asked what the Chinese (in Europe) or the Koreans (in USA) want out of their involvement, so maybe the first step is to ascertain that.
It does not have to be anything sinister. Maybe they just want foreign players who can take part in domestic events - which may not be a huge help for the rest of us. Maybe they hope to see people who can teach go to a high standard, but in that case calling them professional go players would be a bit inconsistent. Indeed, in that case creating a tournament cadre might not be the best use of the money. Giving Robert cash to pursue his research might be a better use
