This Court has held that a stipulated interest rate of 5.

5% per month or 66% per

annum is void for being iniquitous or unconscionable.
16
We have likewise ruled that an
interest rate of 6% per month or 72% per annum is outrageous and inordinate.
17
(Dio v.
SPOUSES VIRGILIO, G.R. No. 154129. July 8, 2005)
In a long line of cases, this Court has invalidated similar stipulations on interest rates for being excessive, iniquitous,
unconscionable and exorbitant. In Solangon v. Salazar,
10
we annulled the stipulation of 6% per month or 72% per
annum interest on a P60,000.00 loan. In the case at bar, the stipulated interest rate is 6% per month, or 72% per
annum. By the standards set in the above-cited cases, this stipulation is similarly invalid. (G.R. Nos. 150773 &
153599 September 30, 2005)
This Court invalidated a stipulated 5.5% per month or 66% per annum interest on a P500,000.00 loan in Medel and a
6% per month or 72% per annum interest on a P60,000.00 loan in Solangon for being excessive, iniquitous,
unconscionable and exorbitant. We held that while the Usury Law has been suspended by Central Bank Circular No.
905, s. 1982, effective on January 1, 1983, and parties to a loan agreement have been given wide latitude to agree
on any interest rate, still stipulated interest rates are illegal if they are unconscionable. Nothing in the said circular
grants lenders carte blanche authority to raise interest rates to levels which will either enslave their borrowers or lead
to a hemorrhaging of their assets. (G.R. No. 168940 November 24, 2009)