My current entry stamp (90 days of a non-O marriage visa entry) expires this week and I won't have the 400k in the bank account long enough (2 months) before July 31. So I will need to extend my current entry by another 60 days (visit Thai Wife).

 

How sure is it that this extension will be granted by local immigration? I know that normally I could do it anytime before my current entry expires; but these are special circumstances under which we are granted stay until July 31.

I just don't want to arrive at immigration office before July 31 and be told that I cannot extend for another 60 days because I am on the automatic July 31 extension and my stamp expired in June or something like that.

If you plan on applying for the one year extension I suggest you apply for the 60 day extension now. I say that since it is not clear that they will consider the "automatic extension" to July 31st as a extension of your entry from your non-o visa.

If you waited until shortly before July 31st you cerainly could apply for the 60 day exension since there is no reqirement for you to have a non-o visa entry. The immigration notice states extensions after July 31st.

It is unclear what will happen when people request standard extensions after the regular end of their permission to stay. While there is no question (in my opinion) that you can stay until July 31, there are two ways this right to stay can be interpreted:

1. You are being provided an automatic extension of your permission to stay, and can apply for a standard extension at any time up until July 31st which (if granted) will run from the date of application.
2. You are being given a grace period that runs until July 31st to either leave the country, or apply for a regular extension. Logically, if this is purely a grace period that allows you to apply for an extension late, the extension would run from the end of your regular permission to stay.

Under this second interpretation, applying for short term extensions of stay would be pointless as the extension would expire prior to the end of the grace period. Only longer extensions (typically one-year) would make sense.

The consensus view appears to be that the first interpretation (you are being given an automatic extension, not simply a grace period) is the correct one. My own view is that the second is more logical.