Introduction Since the first years of the new millennium, the professional accounting environment has witnessed a series of efforts aimed at making the exchange of financial information more universally understandable. The availability of a common framework would allow all the subjects involved in dialogue, regardless of their origins. Hence, the convergence of several national accounting standard setters towards the International Accounting Standards Board (IAS) models (Hermann, Saudagaran & Thomas 2006, p. 44). Among the IAS models, the IAS 16 Property, Plant, and Equipment deal with the accounting treatment for most property, plant, and equipment. IAS allows the use of both cost and evaluation models, while in many countries, including the USA, Spain, and Japan, the current status quo follows historical costs for all property, plant, and equipment (Hermann, Saudagaran & Thomas 2006, p. 43). Through a thorough analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of historical cost and fair value, this paper will offer an interpretation of the reasons why IAS 16 permits both methods. Cost Model and Evaluation Model in the IAS 16 Originally issued in 1982, updated and amended several times, IAS 16 Property, Plant, and Equipment represent a considerable effort toward the internationalization of the accounting standards for property, plant, and equipment. According to IAS 16, property, plant, and equipment are “initially measured at its cost, subsequently measured either using a cost or revaluation model” ( IAS 16 — Property, Plant and Equipment , para. 1). The initial measurement of tangible non-current assets has to be recorded at costs, including all the expenses required to bring the asset to its operational standards. For the measures following the initial recognition, IAS 16 permits both the cost and the revaluation model. According to the cost model, property, plant, and equipment are carried at historical costs minus depreciation and possible impairment losses. Under the revaluation model, assets are carried at fair value at the of revaluation minus subsequent depreciation. Fair value is usually made by an appraisal, and it is crucial that revaluations are made regularly. Discussion Analyzing cost and evaluation models through the lens of the qualitative characteristics that a financial reporting allows understanding the respective merits and disadvantages. The fundamental qualitative features are relevance, faithful representation, verifiability, comparability, timeliness, and understandability ( Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting , para. 7). Relevance indicates the ability of financial information to influence the process of decision-making and includes predictive value and confirmatory value. It is broadly recognized that fair values offer more reliable predictive value than historical cost (Hermann, Saudagaran & Thomas 2006, p. 49). Faithful representation refers to the correspondence between a measurement and the phenomena it purports to represent. In the case of a transaction, fair value seems to provide better representation, while historical cost is more reliable when a historical analysis is required as the data are less manipulable than fair value, which on the contrary are based on subjective appraisals (Hermann, Saudagaran & Thomas 2