Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Create a Delta Hedging Exemption From Equity Options Position Limits, 15225-15228 [E8-5674]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 56 / Friday, March 21, 2008 / Notices
Commission, Office of Investor
Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549–0213.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
Extension: Regulations 14D and 14E, OMB
Control No. 3235–0102, SEC File No.
270–114 Schedule 14D–9.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget the
request for extension of the previously
approved collection of information
discussed below.
Regulation 14D (17 CFR 240.14d–1—
240.14d–11) and Regulation 14E (17
CFR 240.14e–1—240.14e–8) and related
Schedule 14D–9 (17 CFR 240.14d–101)
require information important to
security holders in deciding how to
respond to tender offers. This
information is made available to the
public. Information provided on
Schedule 14D–9 is mandatory. Schedule
14D–9 takes approximately 258 hours
per response to prepare and is filed by
600 companies annually. We estimate
that 25% of the 258 hours per response
(64.5 hours) is prepared by the company
for an annual reporting burden of 38,700
hours (64.5 hours per response × 600
responses).
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid
control number.
Written comments regarding the
above information should be directed to
the following persons: (i) Desk Officer
for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Room 10102,
New Executive Office Building,
Washington, DC 20503 or send an email to
Alexander_T._Hunt@omb.eop.gov; and
(ii) R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way,
Alexandria, VA 22312; or send e-mail
to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. Comments
must be submitted to OMB within 30
days of this notice.
Dated: March 13, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–5678 Filed 3–20–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Mar 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor
Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549–0213.
Extension: Schedule TO, OMB Control No.
3235–0515, SEC File No. 270–456.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget the
request for extension of the previously
approved collection of information
discussed below.
Schedule TO (17 CFR 240.14d–100)
must be filed by a reporting company
that makes a tender offer for its own
securities. Also, persons other than the
reporting company making a tender
offer for equity securities registered
under Section 12 of the Exchange Act
(15 U.S.C. 78l ) (which offer, if
consummated, would cause that person
to own over 5% of that class of the
securities) must file Schedule TO. The
purpose of Schedule TO is to improve
communications between public
companies and investors before
companies file registration statements
involving tender offer statements. This
information is made available to the
public. The information provided on
Schedule TO is mandatory. Schedule
TO takes approximately 43.5 hours per
response and is filed by approximately
2,500 issuers annually. We estimate that
50% of the 43.5 hours per response
(21.75 hours) is prepared by the issuer
for an annual reporting burden of 54,375
hours (21.75 hours per response × 2,500
responses).
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid
control number.
Written comments regarding the
above information should be directed to
the following persons: (i) Desk Officer
for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Room 10102,
New Executive Office Building,
Washington, DC 20503 or send an email to
Alexander_T._Hunt@omb.eop.gov; and
(ii) R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way,
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15225
Alexandria, Virginia 22312; or send an
e-mail to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.
Comments must be submitted to OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
Dated: March 13, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–5679 Filed 3–20–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–57502; File No. SR–Amex–
2008–18]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
American Stock Exchange, LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change to Create a Delta Hedging
Exemption From Equity Options
Position Limits
March 14, 2008.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on March 4,
2008, the American Stock Exchange,
LLC (‘‘Amex’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have
been substantially prepared by Amex.
The Exchange has filed the proposal as
a ‘‘non-controversial’’ rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder,4
which renders it effective upon filing
with the Commission. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend
Amex Rule 904 to establish a delta
hedge exemption from equity options
position limits. The text of the proposed
rule change is available at Amex, the
Commission’s Public Reference Room,
and www.amex.com.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission,
Amex included statements concerning
the purpose of and basis for the
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
2 17
E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM
21MRN1
15226
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 56 / Friday, March 21, 2008 / Notices
proposed rule change and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed
rule change. The text of these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. Amex has prepared
summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
All options contracts listed and traded
on the Exchange are subject to position
and exercise limits as set forth in Amex
Rules 904 and 905. Position limits
restrict the number of options contracts
that an investor, or a group of investors
acting in concert, may own or control in
one particular option class or the
security or securities that underlie that
option class. Similarly, exercise limits
prohibit the exercise of more than a
specified number of contracts on a
particular instrument within five
business days. The Exchange does
provide various hedge exemptions to
permit certain ‘‘hedged’’ positions
greater position limits than the
applicable standard position limit.5
Over the past several years, the
Exchange as well as the other selfregulatory organizations (‘‘SROs’’) have
increased in absolute terms the size of
the options position and exercise limits
as well as the size and scope of available
exemptions for ‘‘hedged’’ positions.6
The exemptions for hedged positions
generally require a one-to-one hedge
(i.e., one stock option contract must be
hedged by the number of shares covered
by the options contract, typically 100
shares). In practice, however, many
firms do not hedge their options
positions in this way. Rather, these
firms engage in what is known as ‘‘delta
hedging,’’ which varies the number of
shares of the underlying security used to
hedge an options position based upon
the relative sensitivity of the value of
the option contract to a change in the
price of the underlying security.7 The
Amex believes that delta hedging is
5 See
Commentary .09 to Amex Rule 904.
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51316
(March 3, 2005), 70 FR 12251 (March 11, 2005) (SR–
Amex–2005–029); 45312 (January 18, 2002), 67 FR
3752 (January 25, 2002) (SR–Amex–2001–42); and
40875 (December 31, 1998), 64 FR 1842 (January 12,
1999) (SR–Amex–98–22). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 45650 (March 26, 2002),
67 FR 15638 (April 2, 2002) (SR–Amex–2001–72).
7 For example, an option with a delta of .5 will
move $0.50 for every $1.00 move in the underlying
stock.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
6 See
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Mar 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
widely accepted for net capital and risk
management purposes.
In 2002, the Commission approved
amendments to Amex Rule 904
providing an expansion to the hedging
strategies exempt from the standard
position and exercise limits.8 In
addition, in 2004, the Commission
approved a proposal of the National
Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(‘‘NASD’’) providing for a delta hedging
exemption from stock options position
and exercise limits for positions held by
affiliates of NASD members approved
by the Commission as ‘‘OTC derivatives
dealers.’’ 9 At that time, the Commission
reiterated its ‘‘support for recognizing
options positions hedged on a delta
neutral basis as properly exempted from
position limits.’’ 10
Proposed Delta Neutral-Based Hedge
Exemption
The Exchange proposes to adopt a
new exemption from equity options
position and exercise limits for
positions held by Amex members and
certain of their affiliates that are ‘‘delta
neutral’’ 11 under a ‘‘permitted pricing
model’’ (as defined below), subject to
certain conditions (‘‘Exemption’’). The
proposed Exemption would only apply
to equity options, i.e. stock options and
options on Exchange Traded Fund
Shares. Any equity option position that
is not ‘‘delta neutral’’ would be subject
to position and exercise limits, subject
to the availability of other exemptions.
Only the ‘‘options contract equivalent of
the net delta’’ 12 of a hedged options
position would be subject to the
appropriate position limits.
Only financial instruments relating to
the security underlying an equity
options position could be included in
any determination of an equity options
8 See
supra note 6.
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50748
(November 29, 2004), 69 FR 70485 (December 6,
2004) (SR–NASD–2004–153).
10 Id. at 70486.
11 ‘‘Delta neutral’’ is defined in proposed
Commentary .10(a) to Rule 904 as an equity options
position that has been fully hedged, in accordance
with a ‘‘Permitted Pricing Model,’’ by a position in
the underlying security or one or more instruments
relating to the underlying security, for the purpose
of offsetting the risk that the value of the option
position will change in response to incremental
changes in the price of the security underlying the
option position.
12 ‘‘Net delta’’ is defined in proposed
Commentary .10(b) to Rule 904 to mean ‘‘the
number of shares (either long or short) required to
offset the risk that the value of an equity options
position will change with incremental changes in
the price of the security underlying the options
position, as determined in accordance with a
Permitted Pricing Model.’’ ‘‘Options Contract
Equivalent of the Net Delta’’ is defined in proposed
Commentary .10(c) to Rule 904 to mean the net
delta divided by the number of shares underlying
the options contract.
9 See
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
position’s net delta or whether the
options position is delta neutral. In
addition, members could not use the
same equity or other financial
instrument position in connection with
more than one hedge exemption.
Accordingly, a stock position used as
part of a delta hedging strategy could
not also serve as the basis for any other
equity hedge exemption.
Permitted Pricing Model
Under this proposal, the calculation
of the delta for any equity option
position, and the determination of
whether a particular equity option
position is delta neutral, is required to
be made using a ‘‘Permitted Pricing
Model.’’ A ‘‘Permitted Pricing Model’’ is
defined in proposed Commentary .10(e)
to Rule 904 to mean the pricing model
maintained and operated by The
Options Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’)
and the pricing models used by: (1) A
member or its affiliate subject to
consolidated supervision by the
Commission pursuant to Appendix E of
Rule 15c3–1 under the Act; 13 (2) a
financial holding company (‘‘FHC’’) or a
company treated as an FHC under the
Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, or
its affiliate subject to consolidated
holding company group supervision; 14
(3) a Commission-registered OTC
13 Use of such pricing model would be required
to be consistent with the requirements of
Appendices E or G, as applicable, to Rules 15c3–
1 and 15c3–4 under the Act in connection with the
calculation of risk-based deductions from capital or
capital allowances for market risk thereunder. See
proposed Commentary .10(e)(2) to Rule 904.
14 An FHC’s affiliate that is part of the FHC’s
consolidated supervised holding company group
would be eligible to use this part of the Exemption.
An FHC’s (or an affiliate’s) use of a proprietary
model would have to be consistent with either: (i)
The requirements of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, as amended from time to
time, in connection with the calculation of riskbased adjustments to capital for market risk under
capital requirements of the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System; or (ii) the standards
published by the Basel Committee on Banking
Supervision, as amended from time to time and as
implemented by such company’s principal
regulator, in connection with the calculation of riskbased deductions or adjustments to or allowances
for the market risk capital requirements of such
principal regulator applicable to such company—
where ‘‘principal regulator’’ means a member of the
Basel Committee on Banking Supervision that is the
home country consolidated supervisor of such
company. See proposed Commentary .10(e)(3) to
Rule 904. It is important to note that the U.S.
activities of entities subject to the Basel standards
are overseen by the Federal Reserve Board, and the
Exchange would be relying upon that oversight in
extending exemptive relief to such entities.
E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM
21MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 56 / Friday, March 21, 2008 / Notices
of compliance with Exchange position
or exercise limits.
Aggregation of Accounts
Members and non-member affiliates
relying on the Exemption would be
required to ensure that the Permitted
Pricing Model applies to all positions
in, or relating to, the security underlying
the relevant options position that are
owned or controlled by the member or
its affiliates.
However, the net delta of an options
position held by an entity entitled to
rely on this Exemption, or by a separate
and distinct trading unit of such entity,
could be calculated without regard to
positions in or relating to the security
underlying the option held by an
affiliated entity or by another trading
unit within the same entity, provided
that: (1) the entity demonstrates to the
Exchange’s satisfaction that no control
relationship, as defined in Commentary
.08 to Rule 904, exists between such
affiliates or trading units; and (2) the
entity has provided the Exchange
written notice in advance that it intends
to be considered separate and distinct
from any affiliate, or, as applicable,
which trading units within the entity
are to be considered separate and
distinct from each other for purposes of
this Exemption.17
The Exchange has set forth in the
proposed Information Circular the
conditions under which it will deem no
control relationship to exist between
entities and between separate and
distinct trading units within the same
entity.
Any member or non-member affiliate
relying on the Exemption would be
required to designate, by prior written
notice to the Exchange, each trading
unit or entity whose options positions
are required by Exchange rules to be
aggregated with the options positions of
such member or non-member affiliate
relying on the Exemption for purposes
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
derivatives dealer; 15 and (4) a national
bank under the National Bank Act. 16
Obligations of Members and Affiliates
Any member relying on the
Exemption would be required to
provide a written certification to the
Exchange stating that it is using a
Permitted Pricing Model as defined in
proposed Commentary .10(e) to Rule
904 for purposes of the Exemption. In
addition, by such reliance, such member
or member organization would
authorize any other person carrying for
such member or member organization
an account, including, or with whom
such member has entered into, a
position in or relating to a security
underlying the relevant option position
to provide to the Exchange or OCC such
information regarding such account or
position as the Exchange or OCC may
request as part of the Exchange’s
confirmation or verification of the
accuracy of any net delta calculation
under this Exemption.18
The options positions of a nonmember affiliate relying on the
Exemption would have to be carried by
a member with whom it is affiliated. A
member carrying an account that
includes an equity option position for a
non-member affiliate that intends to rely
on the Exemption would be required to
obtain from such non-member affiliate a
written certification sufficient that it is
using a Permitted Pricing Model as
defined in the Rule for purposes of the
Exemption.19
15 An OTC derivative dealer’s use of a proprietary
model would be required to be consistent with the
requirements of Appendix F to Rule 15c3–1 and
Rule 15c3–4 under the 1934 Act in connection with
the calculation of risk-based deductions from
capital for market risk thereunder. Only an OTC
derivatives dealer and no other affiliated entity
(including a member) would be able to rely upon
this particular part of the Exemption. See proposed
Commentary .10(e)(4) to Rule 904.
16 The use of a proprietary model by a national
bank would be required to be consistent with the
requirements of the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, as amended from time to time, in
connection with the calculation of risk-based
adjustments to capital for market risk under capital
requirements of the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency. An affiliate of a national bank (including
an Exchange member) would not be permitted to
rely on this part of the Exemption. See proposed
Commentary .10(e)(5) to Rule 904.
17 See proposed Commentary .10(f) to Rule 904.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Mar 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
Position Reporting
Under proposed Commentary .10(h)
to Rule 904, each member or member
organization relying on the Exemption
would be required to report, in
accordance with Rule 906,20 (i) all
18 See
proposed Commentary .10(g) to Rule 904.
addition, the member or member
organization would be required to obtain from such
non-member affiliate a written statement
confirming that such non-member affiliate: (a) Is
relying on the Exemption; (b) will use only a
Permitted Pricing Model for purposes of calculating
the net delta of the option positions for purposes
of the Exemption; (c) will promptly notify the
member or member organization if it ceases to rely
on the Exemption; (d) authorizes the member or
member organization to provide to the Exchange or
the OCC such information regarding positions of the
non-member affiliate as the Exchange or OCC may
request as part of the Exchange’s confirmation or
verification of the accuracy of any ‘‘net delta’’
calculation under the Exemption; and (e) if the nonmember affiliate is using the OCC Model, has duly
executed and delivered to the Exchange such
documents as the Exchange may require to be
executed and delivered to the Exchange as a
condition to reliance on the Exemption. See
proposed Commentary .10(g)(3) to Rule 904.
20 Amex Rule 906 requires, among other things,
that members and member organizations report to
the Exchange aggregate long or short positions on
the same side of the market of 200 or more contracts
19 In
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15227
equity option positions (including those
that are delta neutral) that are reportable
thereunder, and (ii) on its own behalf or
on behalf of a designated aggregation
unit pursuant to proposed Commentary
.10(f) to Rule 904, for each such account
that holds an equity option position
subject to the Exemption in excess of
the levels specified in Rule 904, the net
delta and the options contract
equivalent of the net delta of such
position.
The Exchange and other SROs are
working on modifying the Large Options
Position Reporting system and/or the
OCC reports to allow a member to
indicate that an equity options position
is being delta hedged.
Records
Under proposed Commentary .10(i) to
Rule 904, each member and member
organization relying on the Exemption
would be required to (i) retain, and
would be required to undertake
reasonable efforts to ensure that any
non-member affiliate of the member or
member organization relying on the
Exemption retains, a list of the options,
securities and other instruments
underlying each options position net
delta calculation reported to the
Exchange hereunder, and (ii) produce
such information to the Exchange upon
request.21
Reliance on Federal Oversight
As provided under proposed
Commentary .10(e) to Rule 904, a
Permitted Pricing Model includes
proprietary pricing models used by
members or member organizations and
affiliates that have been approved by the
Commission, the Federal Reserve Board
or another federal financial regulator. In
adopting the proposed Exemption, the
Exchange would be relying on the
rigorous approval processes and
ongoing oversight of a federal financial
regulator. The Exchange notes that it
would not be under any obligation to
verify whether a member or member
organization’s use of a proprietary
pricing model is appropriate or yielding
accurate results.
The Exchange will announce the
operative date of the proposed rule
change in an Information Circular to be
distributed no later than sixty days
following the notice of filing in the
Federal Register. The operative date
shall be no later than thirty days
following distribution of the
of any single class of options contracts dealt in on
the Exchange.
21 A member would be authorized to report
position information of its non-member affiliate
pursuant to the written statement required under
proposed Commentary .10(g)(3)(ii)(d).
E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM
21MRN1
15228
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 56 / Friday, March 21, 2008 / Notices
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 25 and Rule 19b–
4(f)(6) thereunder. 26
A proposed rule change filed under
19b–4(f)(6) normally may not become
operative prior to 30 days after the date
of filing.27 However, Rule 19b–
4(f)(6)(iii) 28 permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action
2. Statutory Basis
is consistent with the protection of
The Exchange believes the proposed
investors and the public interest. The
rule change is consistent with Section
Exchange has requested that the
6(b) of the Act,22 in general, and furthers Commission waive the 30-day operative
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the
delay. The Commission believes that
Act,23 in particular, in that it is designed waiving the 30-day operative delay is
to promote just and equitable principles consistent with the protection of
of trade, to prevent fraudulent and
investors and the public interest
manipulative acts and practices, to
because such waiver would allow the
remove impediments to and perfect the
Exchange to implement the delta
mechanism of a free and open market
hedging exemption from equity options
and a national market system, and, in
position limits without needless delay.
general, to protect investors and the
The Commission notes that it recently
public interest. The Exchange believes
approved a substantially similar
the proposed delta neutral-based hedge
proposal filed by the Chicago Board
exemption from equity options position Options Exchange, Incorporated.29 The
and exercise limits is appropriate in that Commission believes that Amex’s
it is based on a widely accepted risk
proposal to create a delta hedging
management method used in options
exemption from equity options position
trading. In addition, the Commission
limits raises no new issues. For these
has previously stated its support for
reasons, the Commission designates the
recognizing options positions hedged on proposed rule change to be operative
a delta neutral basis as properly
upon filing with the Commission.30
exempted from position limits.24
At any time within 60 days of the
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
filing of such proposed rule change the
Statement on Burden on Competition
Commission may summarily abrogate
such rule change if it appears to the
The Exchange does not believe that
Commission that such action is
the proposed rule change will impose
necessary or appropriate in the public
any burden on competition that is not
interest, for the protection of investors
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
or otherwise in furtherance of the
of the purposes of the Act.
purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Interested persons are invited to
Members, Participants or Others
submit written data, views, and
Information Circular announcing the
notice of filing in the Federal Register,
or such later date as may be necessary
to ensure completion of the required
technology changes by the OCC and the
Securities Industry Automation
Corporation.
No written comments were either
solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Because the foregoing rule change
does not: (1) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) impose any significant
burden on competition; and (3) become
operative for 30 days after the date of
this filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section
22 15
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
24 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40594
(October 23, 1998), 63 FR 59362, 59380 (November
3, 1998) (S7–30–97) (adopting rules relating to OTC
Derivatives Dealers).
23 15
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Mar 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
25 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
27 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule
19b–4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory
organization submit to the Commission written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the
proposed rule change, at least five business days
prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has satisfied the fiveday pre-filing notice requirement.
28 Id.
29 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56970
(December 14, 2007), 72 FR 72428 (December 20,
2007) (SR–CBOE–2007–99).
30 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day
operative delay, the Commission has considered the
proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
26 17
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR-Amex-2008–18 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR-Amex-2008–18. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days
between the hours of 10 am and 3 pm.
Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the
principal office of Amex. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–Amex–
2008–18 and should be submitted on or
before April 11, 2008.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.31
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–5674 Filed 3–20–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
31 17
E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
21MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 56 (Friday, March 21, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15225-15228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-5674]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-57502; File No. SR-Amex-2008-18]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange, LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to
Create a Delta Hedging Exemption From Equity Options Position Limits
March 14, 2008.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 4, 2008, the American Stock Exchange, LLC (``Amex'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Amex. The
Exchange has filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend Amex Rule 904 to establish a delta
hedge exemption from equity options position limits. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at Amex, the Commission's Public
Reference Room, and www.amex.com.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, Amex included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the
[[Page 15226]]
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. Amex has prepared summaries, set
forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of
such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
All options contracts listed and traded on the Exchange are subject
to position and exercise limits as set forth in Amex Rules 904 and 905.
Position limits restrict the number of options contracts that an
investor, or a group of investors acting in concert, may own or control
in one particular option class or the security or securities that
underlie that option class. Similarly, exercise limits prohibit the
exercise of more than a specified number of contracts on a particular
instrument within five business days. The Exchange does provide various
hedge exemptions to permit certain ``hedged'' positions greater
position limits than the applicable standard position limit.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Commentary .09 to Amex Rule 904.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the past several years, the Exchange as well as the other
self-regulatory organizations (``SROs'') have increased in absolute
terms the size of the options position and exercise limits as well as
the size and scope of available exemptions for ``hedged'' positions.\6\
The exemptions for hedged positions generally require a one-to-one
hedge (i.e., one stock option contract must be hedged by the number of
shares covered by the options contract, typically 100 shares). In
practice, however, many firms do not hedge their options positions in
this way. Rather, these firms engage in what is known as ``delta
hedging,'' which varies the number of shares of the underlying security
used to hedge an options position based upon the relative sensitivity
of the value of the option contract to a change in the price of the
underlying security.\7\ The Amex believes that delta hedging is widely
accepted for net capital and risk management purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51316 (March 3,
2005), 70 FR 12251 (March 11, 2005) (SR-Amex-2005-029); 45312
(January 18, 2002), 67 FR 3752 (January 25, 2002) (SR-Amex-2001-42);
and 40875 (December 31, 1998), 64 FR 1842 (January 12, 1999) (SR-
Amex-98-22). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45650
(March 26, 2002), 67 FR 15638 (April 2, 2002) (SR-Amex-2001-72).
\7\ For example, an option with a delta of .5 will move $0.50
for every $1.00 move in the underlying stock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2002, the Commission approved amendments to Amex Rule 904
providing an expansion to the hedging strategies exempt from the
standard position and exercise limits.\8\ In addition, in 2004, the
Commission approved a proposal of the National Association of
Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD'') providing for a delta hedging
exemption from stock options position and exercise limits for positions
held by affiliates of NASD members approved by the Commission as ``OTC
derivatives dealers.'' \9\ At that time, the Commission reiterated its
``support for recognizing options positions hedged on a delta neutral
basis as properly exempted from position limits.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See supra note 6.
\9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50748 (November 29,
2004), 69 FR 70485 (December 6, 2004) (SR-NASD-2004-153).
\10\ Id. at 70486.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Delta Neutral-Based Hedge Exemption
The Exchange proposes to adopt a new exemption from equity options
position and exercise limits for positions held by Amex members and
certain of their affiliates that are ``delta neutral'' \11\ under a
``permitted pricing model'' (as defined below), subject to certain
conditions (``Exemption''). The proposed Exemption would only apply to
equity options, i.e. stock options and options on Exchange Traded Fund
Shares. Any equity option position that is not ``delta neutral'' would
be subject to position and exercise limits, subject to the availability
of other exemptions. Only the ``options contract equivalent of the net
delta'' \12\ of a hedged options position would be subject to the
appropriate position limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ ``Delta neutral'' is defined in proposed Commentary .10(a)
to Rule 904 as an equity options position that has been fully
hedged, in accordance with a ``Permitted Pricing Model,'' by a
position in the underlying security or one or more instruments
relating to the underlying security, for the purpose of offsetting
the risk that the value of the option position will change in
response to incremental changes in the price of the security
underlying the option position.
\12\ ``Net delta'' is defined in proposed Commentary .10(b) to
Rule 904 to mean ``the number of shares (either long or short)
required to offset the risk that the value of an equity options
position will change with incremental changes in the price of the
security underlying the options position, as determined in
accordance with a Permitted Pricing Model.'' ``Options Contract
Equivalent of the Net Delta'' is defined in proposed Commentary
.10(c) to Rule 904 to mean the net delta divided by the number of
shares underlying the options contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only financial instruments relating to the security underlying an
equity options position could be included in any determination of an
equity options position's net delta or whether the options position is
delta neutral. In addition, members could not use the same equity or
other financial instrument position in connection with more than one
hedge exemption. Accordingly, a stock position used as part of a delta
hedging strategy could not also serve as the basis for any other equity
hedge exemption.
Permitted Pricing Model
Under this proposal, the calculation of the delta for any equity
option position, and the determination of whether a particular equity
option position is delta neutral, is required to be made using a
``Permitted Pricing Model.'' A ``Permitted Pricing Model'' is defined
in proposed Commentary .10(e) to Rule 904 to mean the pricing model
maintained and operated by The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
and the pricing models used by: (1) A member or its affiliate subject
to consolidated supervision by the Commission pursuant to Appendix E of
Rule 15c3-1 under the Act; \13\ (2) a financial holding company
(``FHC'') or a company treated as an FHC under the Bank Holding Company
Act of 1956, or its affiliate subject to consolidated holding company
group supervision; \14\ (3) a Commission-registered OTC
[[Page 15227]]
derivatives dealer; \15\ and (4) a national bank under the National
Bank Act. \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Use of such pricing model would be required to be
consistent with the requirements of Appendices E or G, as
applicable, to Rules 15c3-1 and 15c3-4 under the Act in connection
with the calculation of risk-based deductions from capital or
capital allowances for market risk thereunder. See proposed
Commentary .10(e)(2) to Rule 904.
\14\ An FHC's affiliate that is part of the FHC's consolidated
supervised holding company group would be eligible to use this part
of the Exemption. An FHC's (or an affiliate's) use of a proprietary
model would have to be consistent with either: (i) The requirements
of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, as amended
from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based
adjustments to capital for market risk under capital requirements of
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; or (ii) the
standards published by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision,
as amended from time to time and as implemented by such company's
principal regulator, in connection with the calculation of risk-
based deductions or adjustments to or allowances for the market risk
capital requirements of such principal regulator applicable to such
company--where ``principal regulator'' means a member of the Basel
Committee on Banking Supervision that is the home country
consolidated supervisor of such company. See proposed Commentary
.10(e)(3) to Rule 904. It is important to note that the U.S.
activities of entities subject to the Basel standards are overseen
by the Federal Reserve Board, and the Exchange would be relying upon
that oversight in extending exemptive relief to such entities.
\15\ An OTC derivative dealer's use of a proprietary model would
be required to be consistent with the requirements of Appendix F to
Rule 15c3-1 and Rule 15c3-4 under the 1934 Act in connection with
the calculation of risk-based deductions from capital for market
risk thereunder. Only an OTC derivatives dealer and no other
affiliated entity (including a member) would be able to rely upon
this particular part of the Exemption. See proposed Commentary
.10(e)(4) to Rule 904.
\16\ The use of a proprietary model by a national bank would be
required to be consistent with the requirements of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, as amended from time to time, in
connection with the calculation of risk-based adjustments to capital
for market risk under capital requirements of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency. An affiliate of a national bank
(including an Exchange member) would not be permitted to rely on
this part of the Exemption. See proposed Commentary .10(e)(5) to
Rule 904.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aggregation of Accounts
Members and non-member affiliates relying on the Exemption would be
required to ensure that the Permitted Pricing Model applies to all
positions in, or relating to, the security underlying the relevant
options position that are owned or controlled by the member or its
affiliates.
However, the net delta of an options position held by an entity
entitled to rely on this Exemption, or by a separate and distinct
trading unit of such entity, could be calculated without regard to
positions in or relating to the security underlying the option held by
an affiliated entity or by another trading unit within the same entity,
provided that: (1) the entity demonstrates to the Exchange's
satisfaction that no control relationship, as defined in Commentary .08
to Rule 904, exists between such affiliates or trading units; and (2)
the entity has provided the Exchange written notice in advance that it
intends to be considered separate and distinct from any affiliate, or,
as applicable, which trading units within the entity are to be
considered separate and distinct from each other for purposes of this
Exemption.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See proposed Commentary .10(f) to Rule 904.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange has set forth in the proposed Information Circular the
conditions under which it will deem no control relationship to exist
between entities and between separate and distinct trading units within
the same entity.
Any member or non-member affiliate relying on the Exemption would
be required to designate, by prior written notice to the Exchange, each
trading unit or entity whose options positions are required by Exchange
rules to be aggregated with the options positions of such member or
non-member affiliate relying on the Exemption for purposes of
compliance with Exchange position or exercise limits.
Obligations of Members and Affiliates
Any member relying on the Exemption would be required to provide a
written certification to the Exchange stating that it is using a
Permitted Pricing Model as defined in proposed Commentary .10(e) to
Rule 904 for purposes of the Exemption. In addition, by such reliance,
such member or member organization would authorize any other person
carrying for such member or member organization an account, including,
or with whom such member has entered into, a position in or relating to
a security underlying the relevant option position to provide to the
Exchange or OCC such information regarding such account or position as
the Exchange or OCC may request as part of the Exchange's confirmation
or verification of the accuracy of any net delta calculation under this
Exemption.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See proposed Commentary .10(g) to Rule 904.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The options positions of a non-member affiliate relying on the
Exemption would have to be carried by a member with whom it is
affiliated. A member carrying an account that includes an equity option
position for a non-member affiliate that intends to rely on the
Exemption would be required to obtain from such non-member affiliate a
written certification sufficient that it is using a Permitted Pricing
Model as defined in the Rule for purposes of the Exemption.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ In addition, the member or member organization would be
required to obtain from such non-member affiliate a written
statement confirming that such non-member affiliate: (a) Is relying
on the Exemption; (b) will use only a Permitted Pricing Model for
purposes of calculating the net delta of the option positions for
purposes of the Exemption; (c) will promptly notify the member or
member organization if it ceases to rely on the Exemption; (d)
authorizes the member or member organization to provide to the
Exchange or the OCC such information regarding positions of the non-
member affiliate as the Exchange or OCC may request as part of the
Exchange's confirmation or verification of the accuracy of any ``net
delta'' calculation under the Exemption; and (e) if the non-member
affiliate is using the OCC Model, has duly executed and delivered to
the Exchange such documents as the Exchange may require to be
executed and delivered to the Exchange as a condition to reliance on
the Exemption. See proposed Commentary .10(g)(3) to Rule 904.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Position Reporting
Under proposed Commentary .10(h) to Rule 904, each member or member
organization relying on the Exemption would be required to report, in
accordance with Rule 906,\20\ (i) all equity option positions
(including those that are delta neutral) that are reportable
thereunder, and (ii) on its own behalf or on behalf of a designated
aggregation unit pursuant to proposed Commentary .10(f) to Rule 904,
for each such account that holds an equity option position subject to
the Exemption in excess of the levels specified in Rule 904, the net
delta and the options contract equivalent of the net delta of such
position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Amex Rule 906 requires, among other things, that members
and member organizations report to the Exchange aggregate long or
short positions on the same side of the market of 200 or more
contracts of any single class of options contracts dealt in on the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange and other SROs are working on modifying the Large
Options Position Reporting system and/or the OCC reports to allow a
member to indicate that an equity options position is being delta
hedged.
Records
Under proposed Commentary .10(i) to Rule 904, each member and
member organization relying on the Exemption would be required to (i)
retain, and would be required to undertake reasonable efforts to ensure
that any non-member affiliate of the member or member organization
relying on the Exemption retains, a list of the options, securities and
other instruments underlying each options position net delta
calculation reported to the Exchange hereunder, and (ii) produce such
information to the Exchange upon request.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ A member would be authorized to report position information
of its non-member affiliate pursuant to the written statement
required under proposed Commentary .10(g)(3)(ii)(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reliance on Federal Oversight
As provided under proposed Commentary .10(e) to Rule 904, a
Permitted Pricing Model includes proprietary pricing models used by
members or member organizations and affiliates that have been approved
by the Commission, the Federal Reserve Board or another federal
financial regulator. In adopting the proposed Exemption, the Exchange
would be relying on the rigorous approval processes and ongoing
oversight of a federal financial regulator. The Exchange notes that it
would not be under any obligation to verify whether a member or member
organization's use of a proprietary pricing model is appropriate or
yielding accurate results.
The Exchange will announce the operative date of the proposed rule
change in an Information Circular to be distributed no later than sixty
days following the notice of filing in the Federal Register. The
operative date shall be no later than thirty days following
distribution of the
[[Page 15228]]
Information Circular announcing the notice of filing in the Federal
Register, or such later date as may be necessary to ensure completion
of the required technology changes by the OCC and the Securities
Industry Automation Corporation.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act,\22\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\23\ in particular, in that it is designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest. The Exchange believes the proposed delta neutral-based hedge
exemption from equity options position and exercise limits is
appropriate in that it is based on a widely accepted risk management
method used in options trading. In addition, the Commission has
previously stated its support for recognizing options positions hedged
on a delta neutral basis as properly exempted from position limits.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\24\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40594 (October 23,
1998), 63 FR 59362, 59380 (November 3, 1998) (S7-30-97) (adopting
rules relating to OTC Derivatives Dealers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others
No written comments were either solicited or received with respect
to the proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Because the foregoing rule change does not: (1) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) become operative for 30
days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \25\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not
become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.\27\
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \28\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver
would allow the Exchange to implement the delta hedging exemption from
equity options position limits without needless delay. The Commission
notes that it recently approved a substantially similar proposal filed
by the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated.\29\ The Commission
believes that Amex's proposal to create a delta hedging exemption from
equity options position limits raises no new issues. For these reasons,
the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon
filing with the Commission.\30\
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to
the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing
of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by
the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied the five-day pre-filing
notice requirement.
\28\ Id.
\29\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56970 (December 14,
2007), 72 FR 72428 (December 20, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-99).
\30\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-Amex-2008-18 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2008-18. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
am and 3 pm. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of Amex. All comments received will
be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2008-18 and should be submitted on
or before April 11, 2008.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-5674 Filed 3-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P