it might even get cancelled anyway when primary visa cancelled. This happens with other dependent visas. Saw it at work. HR gets the passports of the whole family for processing and visa cancellation.
I may be more risk averse than most but I do not understand taking risks when there is no downside to the safe option? The company should pay for the visa for the dependent and it is a "Better" visa. No need to pay for travel after 180 days as no chance of an extension?
You do know how "Dependent" visas work in the case of B etc? Are you arguing a DTV "Dependent" visa is somehow magically different? On what basis did you come to that conclusion? PS: he is getting a "B". I doubt he is paying anything himself through an agent if working for a company.
Never ever heard of it. In my last company, foreigners were sent to Singapore for the B. Must be hundreds over the years and never an issue - it was a large company.
Legally she would be a "Dependent" on a non-existent visa. If this was for a " B" in same situation it would be cancelled along with yours. Is the DTV linked in a similar fashion in the system? Even if not if anything was found later it might be a sticky situation. What would your employer make of it too if you had to go asking for a dependent on the B at a later date and immigration made it problematic due to misuse of a previous visa? Why take risks? I would just get her the dependent on your new visa.