The thesis empirically investigates two conflicting views on the accounting treatment of R&D outlays according to IAS 38. Proponents of a capitalization of R&D outlays argue that this accounting policy provides relevant information to investors. In contrast, those opposing such a capitalization state that the resulting asset is too uncertain. The findings demonstrate that the arguments of both supporters and opponents basically remain valid and are therefore to some extent incompatible. However, given this incompatibility a discussion of the empirical findings in context with the arguments brought forward within the political debate surrounding IAS 38 illustrates that IAS 38 eventually pursues a reasonable approach to balance these conflicting views.