OUP's applications for US tax-exemption, 1972 and 1997

In May 2000, AKME was sent copies of OUP's applications for its all-important American tax-exemption. Under US law, every would-be charitable organisation has to re-apply for exemption each year. Reproduced below are facsimiles and transcripts of the key pages from OUP USA's original application of 1972 and from one of its more recent ones (1997). Comparison of these reveals that Oxford's first, dubious, 37-line 'justification' has been whittled down to just three.

OUP USA's original, 1972 application

Transcription (1972, page 2)

Part III. - Activities and Operational Information (continued)
(Instruction) Give a narrative description of the activities presently carried on by the organisation. If the organisation is not fully operational, explain what stage of development its activities have reached, what further steps remain for the organisation to become fully operational, and when such further steps will take place. The narrative should specifically identify the services performed or to be performed by the organisation. (Do not state the purposes of the organisation in general terms or repeat the language of the organisational documents.) If the organisation is a school, hospital or medical research organisation, include sufficient information in your description to clearly show that the organisation meets the definition of that particular activity that is contained in the instructions for Part VII-A on page 3 of the instructions

Entry, typed: The University Press has been and is a department of the University of Oxford, Oxford, England, since about 1700 A.D. It conducts all of the publishing activities of the University throughout the world. All rights and property of Oxford University Press are vested in the University of Oxford. The activities of Oxford University Press are directed and controlled by a body entitled "the Delegates of the University Press". The Vice Chancellor and Proctors of the University are ex-officio members of the Delegacy, the Vice Chancellor being the Chairman. The remaining delegates are appointed from among the faculty of the various colleges of the University of Oxford. The delegates serve only during their retention of tenure as members of the faculty. The delegates receive compensation only as members of the faculty. The function of Oxford University Press Inc., the American branch of Oxford University Press, is to publish those materials which serve to advance learning, education and religion in the United States. Oxford University Press Inc. publishes scholarly works eminating (sic) in (sic) the United States and is the sole distributor in the United States for the foreign publications of Oxford University Press. The overall editorial policy of Oxford University Press is determined and controlled by the delegates of the Press. In selecting a work for publication, the editorial staff of Oxford University Press Inc. primarily considers the technical, literary, scientific and philosophical value of the material. While the potential market for a particular book must be considered, the educational and religious value of the piece of the published work (sic) is the deciding factor. The majority of all books published by Oxford University Press Inc. are undertaken with the anticipation that the volume of sales will not be sufficient to produce a profit. The catalogue of Oxford University Press Inc. offers for sale books published in the United States, books published by all other branches of the Press, without discrimination. Of the total number of titles offered through the catalogue, the ratio of imported titles to domestic publications exceeds three to one. Books imported by Oxford University Press Inc. are not otherwise available for sale in the United States. Oxford University Press Inc. has no printing or manufacturing operations.

OUP USA's 1997 application

The 1997 3-line 'justification' is preceded by some interesting figures. A table and transcription follow the facsimile USte97.gif.

Transcription (1997, page 2, typed entries in bold)

Form 990 (1996) 23-7398718

PART II: STATEMENT OF FUNCTIONAL EXPENSES. All organizations must complete column (A). Columns (B), (C), and (D) are required for section 501 (cx3) and (4) organizations and section 4547(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trusts but optional for others (See Specific Instructions on page 13)

Do not include amounts reported on line 6b, 8b, 9b, 10b, or 16 of Part I	no.	(A) Total $	(B) Program services $	(C) Management and general $	(D) Fundraising $
Grants and allocations (attach schedule) cash....... non-cash......	22	-	-	-	-
Specific assistance to individuals (attach schedule)	23	-	-	-	-
Benefits paid to or for members (attach schedule)	24	-	-	-	-
Compensation of officers, directors etc.	25	$1,907,123	$1,650,852	$256,271	-
Other salaries and wages	26	$12,285,371	$10,634,519	$1,650,852	-
Pension plan contributions	27	$985,296	$852,896	$132,400	-
Other employee benefits	28	$1,420,212	$1,229,370	$190,842	-
Payroll taxes	29	$1,077,827	$932,993	$144,834	-
Professional fundraising fees	30	-	-	-	-
Accounting fees	31	$82,284	$71,227	$11,057	-
Legal fees	32	$426,896	$369,591	$57,373	-
Supplies	33	$807,052	$698,604	$108,448	-
Telephone	34	$538,041	$465,741	$72,300	-
Postage and shipping	35	$1,983,987	$1,716868	$266,519	-
Occupancy	36	$17,720	$15,339	$2,381	-
Equipment rental and maintenance	37	$702,369	$607,988	$94,381	-
Printing and publications	38	-	-	-	-
Travel	39	$1,291,432	$1,117,895	$173,537	-
Conferences, conventions, and meetings	40	-	-	-	-
Interest	41	$1,449,650	$1,254,863	$194,797	-
Depreciation, depletion, etc.	42	$2,280,088	$1,973,700	$306,388	-
Other expenses (itemize) a STMT (statement) 2	43a	$15,354,063	$13,290,853	$2,063,210	-
b..............	43b	-	-	-	-
c..............	43c	-	-	-	-
d..............	43d	-	-	-	-
e..............	43e	-	-	-	-
Total functional expenses (add lines 22 through 43) Organizations completing columns (B)-(D) carry these totals to lines 13-15	44	$42,808,879	$36,883,289	$5,725,590	-

Reporting of joint costs:- Did you report in column (B) (program services) any joint costs from a combined educational campaign and fundraising solicitation?........NO
If yes... etc.

PART III: STATEMENT OF PROGRAM SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS (See Specific Instructions on page 16)

What is the organization's primary exempt purpose? SEE STATEMENT 4 (below) All organizations must describe their exempt purpose achievements. State the number of clients served, publications issued, etc. Discuss achievements that are not measurable (Section 501 (c)(3) and (4) orgnizations and section 4547(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trusts must also enter the amount of grants and allocations to others.)	Program Service Expenses (Required for 501 (c)(3) and (4) orgs., and 4547 taxed trusts; but optional for others
a The Oxford University Press Inc.'s purpose is the sale of books whose profits are used to further academic excellence at Oxford University (a U.K. not for profit entity). Grants and allocations $.................	$36,883,289
b........ Grants and allocations $.................	-
c........ Grants and allocations $.................	-
d........ Grants and allocations $.................	-
e Other program services (attach schedule) Grants and allocations $.................	-
f Total of Program Service Expenses (should equal line 44, column (B). Program services....	$36,883,289

Click to return to OUP's US tax-exemption introduction.

August 2007: JIG UP FOR DIFFERENT TOTAL ANIMALS? At last obtained and published by Akme: In all their glory, the granted applications by CUP (1975) and OUP (1977) for exemption from UK tax, including the Inland Revenue correspondence and featuring Papa Crass's fuzzy logic, Ooh we are so antiente and so verie spetiall, the Underliner's Case, Blessed be the Biblebaggers, Lord Trumpington Todd's CV, Oxford's Glowing Beams, Shining Torches and Great Latin Pœnis, and many other classic comedy hits, but not featuring their previous rejected applications (CUP 1940, OUP 1952), which they have, er, "recently lost". Click for CUP/OUP's 1970s Charity Status Press Release and Index December 2007: THE WHEEDLERS' WAR At last obtained and published by Akme: In all their shame, the failed applications by CUP (1940, 1941) and OUP (1944, 1950) for exemption from wartime taxes, featuring the Inland Revenue's rigorous investigations, the Special Commissioners' judgment (1940), the Oxford Vice-Chancellor's exaggeration, and both universities' unpatriotism. Click for CUP/OUP's 1940s Charity Status Press Release, Explanation and Index

March 2009: THE ULTRA VIRES POISE VOLTE-FACE NEW REVELATIONS ABOUT OUP's & CUP's TAX-EXEMPTION Following the JIG UP? posting of 2007, Akme has just obtained (some of) the Inland Revenue papers on CUP and OUP from the 1970s, released last month into the National Archive under the 30-year rule, and featuring numerous mysterious omissions, censored redactions, unexplained contradictions and a host of Freudian asides, non sequiturs and puzzles. "It was felt it might be unpatriotic in 1940... CUP are trying it on, trying to railroad us... I recommend that we resist... Possibly OUP is acting ultra vires in its trading... OUP is almost a case of "the tail wagging the dog"... I would not think it necessary to carry out reviews at all frequently to test for any movement in OUP's poise." sample quotes from IR officials Click for CUP/OUP's 1970s Charity Status Update Press Release and Revised Index

Late-breaking Reece shock: "tax unimportant, we'd simply covenant our profits." THE GATEKEEPER'S CREEP-OUT On 13th February 2007 extracts from a probing interview by Mukund Padmanabhan of OUP's Chief Executive Henry Reece were published in The Hindu newspaper, of Chennai (Madras), India. When quizzed about OUP's infamous poetry-axing of 1998, Reece stated: "We really don't have the people qualified to make judgments about contemporary poetry." (So much then for Oxford's Eng. Lit. Fac. - again). When tested on OUP's tax-exemption, he claimed: "It's not particularly financially important. It is more important as a statement of who we are (sic)." (In which case, who they are will presumably find no difficulty in paying all the back-tax they owe since 1978, renegotiating the numerous takeover deals they have concluded in the interim, and then handing over whatever's left of their £200+ million illegal reserves to a genuine charity - Oxfam perhaps). And when asked what will happen if/when OUP loses its tax-exemption, he asserted: "We would simply covenant our profits to the university." (Following the suggestion first mooted in the Fifth Appendix of The Remedy, but thirty years too late and totally blind, as always, to the fair trading issue.) As for Reece's fantastic "gatekeeper" guff (qv), I am reminded of an acquaintance who won a place to study at Oxford, but after a day-trip to the city turned it down. "Too many old gates," he explained. But apart from noting that the uncharitable writing is now clearly on the Walton Street wall, what Akme really wants to know is why did all these extraordinary admissions, risible suggestions and ill-considered whims creep out on the quiet in an Indian newspaper published five thousand miles away? Was Reece shyly, slyly kite-flying, by any chance, retro-active pre-emptive like? Kite-flying, of course, is a sub-continental speciality, but in 2001 OUP came down to earth there with a bang. - A. M. Click now for the Akme version or the Hindu version (exits www.akme)

The Cheesiest Adverts in Publishing History I can't find any textbooks... I am a textbook While Oxford University continues to sink in the world rankings, OUP USA has lately issued a series of YouTube videos which are surely the cheapest, creepiest, nastiest, most risble efforts ever conceived by a publisher. Watch OUP scraping the very bottom of its mouldy, 532-year-old barrel, but be warned: these are not spoofs. * The Wanky Labels * The Nagging Cough * The Aunt Cillaries * The Cardboard Calculator * * The Phoney Cuddle * The Freudian Slip * and for finale: The Trailer Travesty *

15th April 2009: BLACK DAY IN BLUESVILLE Akme Skewers Draw Blood Guardian Response article by Andrew Malcolm AKMEFLASH: On the morning of 15th April, OUP Communications Director Rachel Goode rushed a circular out to all OUP employees ordering them not to respond to this article - possibly an infringement of their human rights under EU law. Also Lord Xenu and the Delegates Private Eye review of OUP scientology shocker

April 2008: THE GRISTMILLER'S GRIND On 25th January 2008 The Bookseller magazine bravely raised the contentious question of the university presses' tax-exemption, most notably OUP's and CUP's, quoting Andrew Malcolm on the subject. On 8th February, after consulting its lawyers (and with their slight modifications), it then published on its leader page Malcolm's response letter, airing for the first time some of the hitherto suppressed revelations posted on this website. It also widened the 'public benefit' discussion attending the new Charities Act to include the commercial activities not just of Oxbridge's university presses, but of the two universities themselves, and of their 76 "totally separate" colleges. Then on 24th April The Bookseller published attacks by rival, tax-liable academic publishers on the two UPs' manifestly unfair privilege. The Gristmiller's straws are in the wind... Click now for Enter The Gristmiller (25/1 article + 8/2 letter), The Gristmiller's Grind (rivals' attack, 24/4), Locals' Grind (Oxford rivals, 16/5). For recent background grist, go to TOUCH ME MINKY and PLEASE TOUCH ME MINKY.