fraud
noun · Betrug
Betrug for criminal fraud, § 263 StGB, but the German offence is a tight causal chain the broad English word does not carry, a Täuschung must produce an Irrtum, the victim must make a Vermögensverfügung, and a Vermögensschaden must follow, all of it, or the completed offence is not made out. English fraud is complete on the dishonest representation alone, and the civil deceit an English lawyer also calls fraud is arglistige Täuschung, § 123 BGB, not Betrug at all.
Which translation, when
Why
English fraud is a broad conduct offence, complete before any loss, and German Betrug is a narrow result crime that requires one. Under § 263 StGB Betrug is a chain that must close, a Täuschung, an assertion or suppression of facts, must cause an Irrtum in the victim, the victim must make a Vermögensverfügung in that error, and a Vermögensschaden must result, and the defendant must have acted to secure an unlawful Vermögensvorteil. Break the chain anywhere, no reliance, no loss, and the completed Betrug fails, leaving at most an attempt, § 263 Abs. 2 StGB. English fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 asks far less, the dishonest false representation is itself the offence, complete when made with intent to gain or cause loss, whether or not anyone believed it or lost anything. Two more things travel badly, the fraud an English lawyer means by deceit is civil, arglistige Täuschung under § 123 BGB, which lets the deceived party avoid the contract rather than prosecuting, and fraud by abuse of a position of trust is closer to Untreue, § 266 StGB, than to Betrug. So Betrug names one narrow slice of what English fraud covers, and calling every fraud a Betrug overstates what German criminal law will actually reach.
Typical mistakes
- Betrug is a completed offence, § 263 StGB, needing a Täuschung, an Irrtum, a Vermögensverfügung and a Vermögensschaden, so a fraud that caused no reliance or no loss is at most versuchter Betrug, not the finished crime.
- The deceit an English lawyer calls fraud in a contract is civil, arglistige Täuschung under § 123 BGB, a ground to avoid the contract, not automatically a Betrug prosecution.
- Fraud by abuse of a position of trust maps closer to Untreue, § 266 StGB, than to Betrug, so labelling it Betrug points at the wrong offence.
What matters
White-collar and contract-fraud matters meet a narrower offence: Betrug under § 263 StGB needs the full chain from Täuschung to Vermögensschaden, and the civil deceit is arglistige Täuschung, § 123 BGB. The report calling a bare dishonest misstatement Betrug has overstated it, the completed offence needing a resulting loss the English wrong does not require.
What the machine misses
Fraud comes back as Betrug in machine output across every context, and the German word narrows what the English one sweeps in, § 263 StGB is a completed chain, a Täuschung causing an Irrtum, a Vermögensverfügung and a Vermögensschaden, none of which the English fraud, complete on the dishonest representation, requires. So a dishonest representation that misled no one and cost nothing, already fraud in England, reads in translation as a completed Betrug it does not amount to, and the civil arglistige Täuschung the lawyer also called fraud disappears into the criminal word.
Examples
| to commit fraud | einen Betrug begehen |
| fraud by false representation | Betrug durch Täuschung |
| to obtain by fraud | durch Betrug erlangen |
| a fraudulent misrepresentation | eine arglistige Täuschung |