Editing Oxford University Press (section)

===Tax-exemption controversies===
Since the 1940s, both OUP and the [[Cambridge University Press]] (CUP), had made applications to the Inland Revenue for exemption from corporate tax. The first application, by CUP in 1940, was rejected "on the ground that, since the Press was printing and publishing for the outside world and not simply for the internal use of the University, the Press's trade went beyond the purpose and objects of the University and (in terms of the Act) was not exercised in the course of the actual carrying out of a primary purpose of the University."<ref>[http://www.akmedea.com/MHB-267.jpg M.H. Black, Cambridge University Press 1584-1984, CUP, 1984,p267]</ref> Similar applications by OUP in 1944 and 1950 were also rejected by the Inland Revenue, whose officers repeatedly pointed out that the university presses were in open competition with commercial, tax-liable publishers. In November 1975, CUP's chief executive [[Geoffrey Cass]] again applied to the Inland Revenue, and a year later, CUP's tax exemption was quietly conceded.<ref>[http://www.akmedea.com/MHB-267.jpg G Bridden, letter to Geoffrey Cass, 9 November 1976]</ref><ref>[http://www.akmedea.com/MHB-283.jpg M.H. Black, Cambridge University Press 1584-1984, CUP, 1984,p282]</ref> OUP's Chief Executive George Richardson followed suit in 1977. OUP's tax exemption was granted in 1978. The decisions were not made public. The issue was only brought to public attention due to press interest in OUP following the poetry list closure controversy.<ref name="Mammon" /> In 1999, the [[Civil society campaign|campaigner]] Andrew Malcolm published his second book, ''The Remedy'', where he alleged that OUP breached its 1978 tax-exemption conditions. This was reported in a front-page article in ''[[The Oxford Times]]'', along with OUP's response.<ref>[http://www.akmedea.com/oxtimes.jpg Reg Little, 'OUP denies it has breached Charity rules', The Oxford Times, 5 November 1999]</ref>

In March 2001, after a 28-year battle with the Indian tax authorities, OUP lost its tax exemption in India. The Supreme Court ruled that OUP was not tax exempt in the subcontinent "because it does not carry out any university activities there but acts simply as a commercial publisher".<ref>[http://www.akmedea.com/oxtimes2.jpg Maggie Hartford 'A Message from India', The Oxford Times, 30 March 2001]</ref> To pay off back taxes, owed since the 1970s, OUP was obliged to sell its Mumbai headquarters building, Oxford House. ''[[The Bookseller]]'' reported that "The case has again raised questions about OUP's status in the UK".<ref>[https://www.thebookseller.com/news/2001-oup-india-forced-pay-back-tax The Bookseller Editorial team, 'OUP India forced to pay back tax', ''The Bookseller'', 1 June 2001]</ref> In 2003, Joel Rickett of ''The Bookseller'' wrote an article in ''[[The Guardian]]'' describing the resentment of commercial rivals at OUP's tax exemption. Rickett accurately predicted that the funds which would have been paid in tax were "likely to be used to confirm OUP's dominance by buying up other publishers."<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/books/2003/aug/30/featuresreviews.guardianreview21 Joel Rickett, 'latest news from the world of publishing', ''The Guardian'', 30 August 2003]</ref> Between 1989 and 2018, OUP bought out over 70 rival book and journal publishers. In 2007, with the new "public benefit" requirement of the revised Charities Act, the issue was re-examined <ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/education/2007/apr/17/administration.highereducation Jessica Shepherd, 'Freedom of the presses', the Guardian, 17 April 2007]</ref> with particular reference to OUP.<ref>[http://www.akmedea.com/bkslr5.jpg Tom Tivnan, 'Charities review could hit publishers', The Bookseller, 2007]</ref> In the same year, Malcolm obtained and posted the documents of OUP's applications to the Inland Revenue for tax exemption in the 1940s and 1950s (unsuccessful)<ref>[https://www.akmedea.com/1940indx.html 'CUP'S and OUP'S claims for tax-exemption, 1940-1950", Index of scans on the Akmedea website]</ref> and the 1970s (successful).<ref>[https://www.akmedea.com/75aindex.html 'CUP's and OUP's tax-exemption applications, 1975-78', Index of scans on the Akmedea website]</ref> In 2008, CUP's and OUP's privilege was attacked by rival publishers.<ref>[https://www.thebookseller.com/news/rivals-attack-oup-and-cup Philip Jones,'Rivals attack OUP and CUP', ''The Bookseller'', 24 April 2008]</ref><ref>[https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/2276814.oup-status-attacked/ Chris Koenig, 'OUP status attacked', Oxford Mail, 16 May 2008]</ref> In 2009, ''[[The Guardian]]'' invited Andrew Malcolm to write an article on the subject.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Malcolm |first1=Andrew |title=The Oxbridge presses aren't charities, but are given unfair tax breaks |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/apr/15/cambridge-univsersity-press-oxford |access-date=22 August 2024 |work=The Guardian |date=14 April 2009}}</ref>