I have been going back and forth between these options. If I go with the retirement extension, to my current 90 day non-immigrant O, I cannot work in any capacity and need to show more income than what is required for the marriage extension. The monetary requirement is less for a marriage extension and I can work, but I have heard that the downside to registering my marriage to my Thai wife may jeopardize her ability to purchase and own land. We have been married 12 years (US marriage) and she currently owns land in Phuket that we bought 4 years ago. Is it true that Thai women married to farangs have land ownership restrictions?

That law has been abolished years ago, your wife can own land in her own name without any problem.

but I have heard that the downside to registering my marriage to my Thai wife may jeopardize her ability to purchase and own land. We have been married 12 years (US marriage) and she currently owns land in Phuket that we bought 4 years ago. Is it true that Thai women married to farangs have land ownership restrictions?

There are no restrictions whatsoever apart from the fact that you will have to sign a form at the land office saying that you have no rights to the land. She can own as much land as she wants.

That is good news.

OK then, given the lower income, lower bank balance requirement, and the ability to work on a marriage extension, isn't that extension a better choice for me than the retirement extension, assuming I can meet all the requirements for both? Am I overlooking something?

but I have heard that the downside to registering my marriage to my Thai wife may jeopardize her ability to purchase and own land. We have been married 12 years (US marriage) and she currently owns land in Phuket that we bought 4 years ago. Is it true that Thai women married to farangs have land ownership restrictions?

There are no restrictions whatsoever apart from the fact that you will have to sign a form at the land office saying that you have no rights to the land. She can own as much land as she wants.

As far as I know, the form states that the money used for the buying of the land/building is from the Thai who buys the land and was not given to the Thai by a foreigner and said money did not come from abroad.

If, and only if, the form would have stated that the farang has no rights whatsoever to the land, and not stipu;ating where the money comes from, it might be possible that because you have supplied the money you might claim the land if you want your money back.

And by signing the form, you have no rights whatsoever.

That is good news.

OK then, given the lower income, lower bank balance requirement, and the ability to work on a marriage extension, isn't that extension a better choice for me than the retirement extension, assuming I can meet all the requirements for both? Am I overlooking something?

If you can meet both, go for retirement. That one is much easier and you will get your extension the same day. For an extension based on marriage you will need to submit a lot mor paperwork and they will take it into consideration. You will have to come back a second time to get the full extension.

Also a retirement extension makes you independent of your wife. When on an extension based on marriage you are dependend of your wife. When the marriage ends (divorce or death) so does your permission to stay.