This paper reassesses the empirical basis for Kratzer and Selkirk’s (2007) phase-based account of prosodic phrasing in German, which argues that prosodic structure follows syntactic phase-based spell-out. It examines two key claims: (1) the contrast in main stress placement between stative and eventive intransitive clauses, attributed to their syntactic differences, and (2) the claim that VP-internal PPs are never stressed in neutral utterances, with stress always falling on the c-commanding accusative argument. I argue that the intransitive stress contrast follows from Diesing’s (1990) syntactic analysis and the nuclear stress rule, while the VP-internal PP stress pattern is better explained by information structure, as these PPs can be interpreted as given. The findings suggest that syntax and information structure, rather than phase-based prosody, better account for German stress patterns.