This paper presents and compares two of the most renowned guidelines---the Danish and the MERITUM---on reporting of intangibles which have been developed in Europe in recent years. Both works propose a set of recommendations on how to complement traditional financial statements with the publication of an intellectual capital report disclosing additional information on a firm's intangible resources and activities. The study observes some differences between these two guidelines in their methodology and scope, the terminology they use, and the way they classify actions and indicators. The study, based on personal interviews, has important policy implications and recommendations for practitioners.

The purpose of this study is to present and compare two of the most renowned guidelines for reporting on intangibles which have been developed in Europe in recent years: the "Guidelines for the Management and Disclosure of Information on Intangibles", developed by MERITUM, a EU-funded research network; and "A Guideline for Intellectual Capital Statements", authored by a task-force financed by the Danish government (Figure 1). Both guidelines consist of a set of recommendations, useful for practitioners, on how to manage and report on Intellectual Capital (IC). Among the existing guidelines, they probably have the broadest institutional and corporate support, and they have been applied by hundreds of firms and research centers across the globe (Nordika, 2002; and Bukh and Johanson, 2003).

Accounting Research Journal, Danish Guidelines, Financial Statements, Policy Implications, Intellectual Capital Statements, MERITUM Guidelines, Capital Markets, European Commission, Business Firms, Non-profit Organizations, IC Management, Intangibles Management System, Knowledge Management, MERITUM Project,