Short answer. Chiefly the value of the thing stolen. Article 309 sets a ladder of eight brackets, from property worth over ₱1,200,000 down to items of ₱500 or less, and the proven peso value places the case on one rung and fixes the penalty range.
What the law says
if the value of the property stolen is more than Twenty thousand pesos (₱20,000) but does not exceed Six hundred thousand pesos (₱600,000)
Revised Penal Code, Article 309 — Penalties For Theft. Read the full provision →
What the law says
when the value of the thing stolen is not over Five hundred pesos (₱500), and the offender shall have acted under the impulse of hunger, poverty, or the difficulty of earning a livelihood for the support of himself or his family
Revised Penal Code, Article 309 — Penalties For Theft. Read the full provision →
Value is the main dial
Article 309 does not define theft; it prices it. The article lists eight numbered brackets, and the proven value of what was taken decides which one applies. At the top, property worth more than ₱1,200,000 draws prisión mayor, with a year added for each additional ₱1,000,000 and a hard ceiling of twenty years. In the middle sits the bracket most ordinary cases fall into — if the value of the property stolen is more than Twenty thousand pesos (₱20,000) but does not exceed Six hundred thousand pesos (₱600,000). At the bottom, items worth ₱500 or less carry only arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods.
The amounts here are the 2017 ones
This is the single most important thing to check before relying on any figure. The brackets above are those set by Republic Act No. 10951 (2017), which revised property values and fines throughout the Revised Penal Code. Older reproductions — printed codes, older websites, reviewers — still show the 1930 amounts, where theft and estafa thresholds appear as 12,000 and 22,000 pesos and the current figures run to millions. Using an outdated table can put a case several brackets too high and produce a wildly wrong estimate of exposure. Always confirm which version of the Code a source is giving you before you draw any conclusion from a number.
Proving value, and why it is contested
Because everything turns on the peso figure, value is often the real battleground. It is the value of the thing at the time it was taken, not what it cost when new and not what it would cost to replace today. Receipts, official price lists, appraisals and market quotations are the usual proof; a complainant's bare estimate is weak. Where no value is satisfactorily established, the court cannot simply assume a high bracket. For anyone accused, this means the documentary record of value is worth as much attention as the question of who took the item — a successful challenge to valuation can move the case down several rungs of the ladder.
What value alone does not decide
Two things sit outside the value table. First, the article's last paragraph provides a specially reduced penalty when the value of the thing stolen is not over Five hundred pesos (₱500), and the offender shall have acted under the impulse of hunger, poverty, or the difficulty of earning a livelihood for the support of himself or his family — need is expressly recognised. Second, and far more consequential, value is not the whole story where the taking was qualified — by grave abuse of confidence, by the nature of the property, or by the circumstances of the taking — because qualified theft carries penalties well above this ladder. Nor does this article govern robbery, which involves violence or intimidation, or carnapping, which has its own special law. If you are facing a complaint, secure documents on the item's true value early and take them to a lawyer.