Estafa in the Philippines: Elements and Penalty

Estafa is defined in Article 315. It applies to "Any person who shall defraud another" by one of the means listed in the article. Three of them come up most often.

1. Abuse of confidence (Article 315, paragraph 1(b)). The offender received money or goods in trust, on commission, for administration or with a duty to return them, and then kept or used them, or denied receiving them.

2. Deceit (paragraph 2(a)). The offender lied to get the money, for example by using a fake name or pretending to have power, influence, qualifications, a business or a transaction that does not exist. The law requires the lie to be made "prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud". A lie told only after the money was handed over does not fit this paragraph.

3. Checks (paragraph 2(d)). The offender paid with a check, or postdated one, while having no funds or not enough funds in the bank. If the drawer does not deposit the amount within three days after notice that the check bounced, the law treats this as prima facie evidence of deceit.

For a plain-language summary of the word, see Estafa.

See also the comparison theft vs estafa.

For estafa by abuse of confidence, the Supreme Court in Corpuz v. People (2014) listed four elements:

1. The offender received money, goods or other property in trust, on commission, for administration or under a duty to deliver or return it.
2. The offender misappropriated or converted it, or denied receiving it.
3. This caused a loss to another person.
4. The offended party made a demand on the offender.

On the fourth element, the Court said demand "may be verbal". It does not have to be formal, and the word "demand" does not have to be used. Even a simple question about where the money or property is can count as a demand.

For estafa by deceit, the key question is timing: was there a lie before or at the moment the victim gave the money, and did the victim give it because of that lie?

These are the brackets of Article 315 for all means except bouncing checks. The ranges come from the table of durations in Article 76 of the Code.

The table shows what the law allows, not the sentence a court will impose. For the same figures in one place, see Estafa penalties by amount.

Yes. Paragraph 2(d) has its own scale. Even the lowest bracket, up to ₱40,000, is prision mayor in its minimum period (6 years and 1 day to 8 years). Over ₱40,000 up to ₱1,200,000, it is prision mayor in its medium period (8 years and 1 day to 10 years). The scale keeps rising, and above ₱8,800,000 the penalty is reclusion perpetua.

A bounced check can also lead to a separate case under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, the Bouncing Checks Law. See BP 22 vs estafa for how the two differ.

Until 2017, the brackets of Article 315 still used the peso amounts the legislature set in 1930. While Corpuz v. People was pending, the Court itself took up the question of whether those old amounts should be adjusted to today's value of money, and invited outside experts to give their views. The Supreme Court refused to adjust them. It said it "cannot modify the said range of penalties because that would constitute judicial legislation". Under Article 5 of the Code, it sent a copy of its decision to the President, through the Department of Justice, and to the leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Congress later raised the amounts in Republic Act No. 10951 (2017). That law applies retroactively where it is favorable to the accused or to a person already serving a final sentence.

Prescription is the time limit to file a criminal case. Under Article 90, as amended by Republic Act No. 4661, crimes punished by arresto mayor prescribe in five years, and crimes punished by a correctional penalty prescribe in ten years. So:

• estafa of up to ₱40,000 (arresto mayor) prescribes in 5 years;
• estafa of over ₱1,200,000 up to ₱2,400,000 (prision correccional) prescribes in 10 years.

For the other brackets, the penalty spans two penalties of different classes, and the sources on this page do not settle which one fixes the period, so this page gives no figure for them. The period starts from the day the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents. See How many years before a criminal case prescribes?

Usually not. If a borrower simply fails to pay on time, with no lie at the start and no property held in trust, none of the means listed in Article 315 may be present. That is normally a matter for a civil case to collect the money. It can become estafa only if the facts fit one of the listed means, for example a lie told to get the loan. See Can you go to jail for unpaid debt?

These are made-up examples to show how the rules work. They are not advice for any real case.

Liza gives Ana bags worth ₱30,000 on consignment: sell them within a month or return them. Ana sells the bags and keeps the money. When Liza texts "Nasaan na yung bags?", Ana says she never received them. This may be estafa by abuse of confidence, and Liza's text can count as a demand. The amount is up to ₱40,000, so the bracket is arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods.

Ramon pretends to be a recruiter with a job slot in Dubai and collects a ₱90,000 "processing fee" from Jun. The lie came before the payment, so this may be estafa by deceit. The amount falls in the bracket for over ₱40,000 up to ₱1,200,000. Other laws on recruitment may also apply. Before paying any agency, check its license on the official list: see How to check a recruitment agency.

Carlo borrows ₱50,000 from his cousin and cannot pay on the due date. He told no lie and held nothing in trust. This may not be estafa at all, and his cousin's remedy is likely a civil case to collect.

Keep every proof: receipts, signed acknowledgments, chat messages, bank or e-wallet records, and any message where you asked for the money or goods back. Under Rule 110 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, a criminal case starts with a complaint filed with the proper officer for preliminary investigation. For offenses that do not need a preliminary investigation, the complaint goes directly to the Municipal Trial Court or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, or to the office of the prosecutor. In Manila and other chartered cities, the complaint is filed with the office of the prosecutor, unless their charters provide otherwise.

If you are the one accused, a pending case can matter for clearances. An NBI clearance can show a HIT when a name matches a record or pending case in the NBI database: see NBI clearance HIT.

Talk to a lawyer before you file an estafa complaint, or as soon as you receive a subpoena or a complaint against you. A lawyer can check whether the facts fit one of the means in Article 315, which bracket applies, whether the case is still within the time limit, and whether the dispute is really a civil one. If you cannot afford a lawyer, see Free legal help in the Philippines for the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) and other options.