citygirl said:
FWIW - and as always, I recommend getting your residency if possible - I don't think you would have any problems if you went to Uruguay. Despite other's assertions that this is a new policy and an example of the crack-down, it's not. The policy has been (at least for the last 4 years) that the border agents can't override the date/stamp given at Migraciones in PM.
If you want to begin the residency process, by all means do so. Again, it's a good thing.
But if you just want to get in compliance, go to Uruguay or some other locale and get your 90 stay stamp.
With all due respect.
Sorry, but there are no assertions that there is a new policy, there is a new policy (the new
decreto).
Now indeed remains the question whether it will be enforced or not (at least on the DGM side, it's getting a bit more tough).
Nobody said there is a crackdown or implied there is one, it's just a possibility, and in the OP's case, her visa was renewed for 3 days at the border (another fact).
I agree with you that it's unlikely a global crackdown could arise.
As for going to Uruguay anyway, you are the only one recommending that (it's all to your honor to have a different view though), but imho there are strictly no advantages going to Uruguay (a false sense of being "legal" maybe).
Not going to Uruguay implies 0 risks vs. a smallish potential risk if going to (even if it's a 0.5 or 2% risk, why take it?).
The debate residency vs citizenship could last forever.
However the citizenship process is effective, less costly, more flexible (less requisites) and faster than the residency one. Why bother with the residency one then?!
Disclaimer : not saying all of this to promote BC (there are anyway many other lawyers in BA), it's my own opinion.
OP : Do not go to Uruguay, sincerely. For all the other aspects, make up your own mind.