Palladium-catalyzed coupling reactions have received enormous attention in recent years, as illustrated by the Nobel Prize in 2010. [1] Despite this, there are many questions remaining to be answered in the field. One concerns the nature and activation of Pd 0 precatalysts that are frequently employed in couplings. Taking [Pd 0 (PPh 3 ) 4 ] as a common example, it is generally agreed that this complex must lose two phosphine ligands to enter catalytic cycles as a [Pd 0 (PPh 3 ) 2 ] complex. [2] However, why would the complex do a rare double dissociation from the 18-electron tetrakis complex to reach a doubly unsaturated state? Furthermore, why is the 18electron complex preferred, when it is well known that Pd 0 has a full shell of d orbitals and only the 5s orbital available for accepting dative bonds? [3] To illuminate some of these issues, we have undertaken a detailed study of the energies and electronic structures of the different [Pd(PPh 3 ) n ] complexes.The 18-electron rule has been an important guideline for studying the coordination chemistry of transition metals. The theory behind it is that each ligand can donate its electron pair(s) to one of nine available valence orbitals (s, p, or d) on the transition metal. However, it is now generally accepted that for most transition metals, the p orbitals are too high in energy to participate in valence bonding, removing a theoretical foundation for the 18-electron rule. [3,4] Inorganic chemists have also long been able to rationalize complex geometries using ligand field theory (LFT) based solely on d orbitals. [5] Using valence bond concepts, Landis and Weinhold have shown that transition metal coordination can be understood in terms of 6 valence orbitals (s and d only) in combination with 3-center-4-electron bonds, so-called w bonds. [3] The Landis-Weinhold theory can rationalize observed geometries not only of most 18-electron complexes, but also well-known exceptions to the 18-electron rule like the square planar d 8 complexes (e.g., Pd II ) and linear d 10 complexes (e.g., Au I ). However, [Pd 0 (PPh 3 ) 4 ] follows the 18-electron rule and apparently violates the Landis-Weinhold theory, which instead predicts the catalytically competent [Pd 0 (PPh 3 ) 2 ] as the preferred state, and in fact defines this complex as hypervalent.In the current study, we will use the labels P 1 -P 4 to designate the number of phosphine ligands bound to Pd 0 (e.g., P 2 means [Pd 0 (PPh 3 ) 2 ]), with the addition "Cl" showing an anionic complex with a chloride ligand in addition to the phosphines. Our starting point for the current study was a previous investigation at the B3LYP level, where P 2 was identified as the preferred state, [6] in violation of crystal data [7] as well as studies of the ligation preference in solution. [8] However, recent improvements allowing inclusion of dispersion interactions into DFT calculations [9,10] have shown that it is now possible to quantify binding energies to transition metals, [11] as well as model processes like the oxidative additi...