本研究旨在於檢視投資性不動產公允價值之價值攸關性；同時驗證投資性不動產公允價值認列入帳或是附註揭露，對投資者是否有不同的效應。依照國際財務報導準則(IFRSs)IAS 40規定，投資性不動產之會計政策，企業可自行選擇採取成本模式或公允價值模式。依據我國證券發行人財務報告編製準則(2013年12月30日修正)，2014年開始，企業首次採用IFRSs，投資性不動產原始衡量得以公允價值作為認定成本；後續衡量得選用公允價值模式或成本模式。選用成本模式者，需附註揭露投資性不動產公允價值。綜合股價模式與股票模式的分析結果顯示，僅有微弱證據支持成本模式下附註揭露的投資性不動產公允價值具有價值攸關性，但是公允價值模式認列入帳的投資性不動產公允價值，反而不具有價值攸關性，認列入帳的投資性不動產公允價值之市場評價，沒有高於附註揭露的投資性不動產公允價值。此研究結果的原因可能是所有上市、櫃公司中，僅有15家公司採用公允價值模式，可以觀值家數太少，造成實證結果與預期不符。

The objective of this paper is to examine whether the provision fair value of investment property in firms’ financial statements under IFRS have value relevance. According to Taiwan Regulations Governing the Preparation of Financial Reports by Securities Issuers, a securities issuer can choose fair value model displaying fair value of investment property by recognition directly. Securities issuer can also choose cost model by provide fair value of investment property under disclosure. This paper investigates empirically whether fair value of investment property under fair value model and cost model of Taiwan companies provide the securities market with different value-relevant information. This study uses actual data on other comprehensive income for a sample of Taiwan firms listed in Taiwan in the period 2013-2014. The findings of this study suggest that fair value of investment property under disclosure of firms choosing cost model have weak association with stock returns. However, fair value of investment property under recognition directly of firms choosing fair value model have no value relevance.