Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change Related to Amendments to Rule 925 (Confirmations) and Rule 921 (Opening of Accounts), 63527-63529 [E8-25371]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Notices
ending on the last day of the month
ended immediately prior to the most
recent distribution declaration date,3
expressed as a percentage of NAV per
share as of such date, is no more than
1 percentage point greater than the
fund’s average annual total return for
the 5-year period ending on such date; 4
and
2. The transmittal letter
accompanying any registration
statement filed with the Commission in
connection with such offering discloses
that the fund has received an Order
under section 19(b) to permit it to make
periodic distributions of long-term
capital gains with respect to its common
stock as frequently as twelve times each
year, and as frequently as distributions
are specified in accordance with the
terms of any outstanding preferred stock
that such fund may issue.
VII. Amendments to Rule 19b–1
The requested relief will expire on the
effective date of any amendment to rule
19b–1 that provides relief permitting
certain closed-end investment
companies to make periodic
distributions of long-term capital gains
with respect to their outstanding
common shares as frequently as twelve
times each year.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Investment Management, under delegated
authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–25361 Filed 10–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release Nos. 33–8980; 34–58813; File No.
4–573]
Roundtable on Mark-to-Market
Accounting
Securities and Exchange
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of roundtable discussion;
request for comment.
AGENCY:
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
SUMMARY: On October 29, 2008 from 9
a.m. to 1 p.m., the Securities and
Exchange Commission will hold a
roundtable to discuss mark-to-market
accounting and the recent period of
market turmoil. The roundtable will be
organized as two panels. The panels
will include investors, issuers, auditors,
3 If the fund has been in operation fewer than two
years, the measured period will begin immediately
following the fund’s first public offering.
4 If the fund has been in operation fewer than five
years, the measured period will begin immediately
following the fund’s first public offering.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Oct 23, 2008
Jkt 217001
63527
and other parties with experience in
mark-to-market accounting.
Additionally, representatives from the
Financial Accounting Standards Board,
the International Accounting Standards
Board and the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board will be
present as observers.
The roundtable will be held in the
auditorium of SEC headquarters at 100
F Street, NE., Washington, DC. The
roundtable will be open to the public
with seating on a first-come, first-served
basis. The roundtable discussions also
will be available via Webcast on the
SEC’s Web site at https://www.sec.gov.
The roundtable agenda and other
materials related to the roundtable,
including a list of participants and
moderators, will be accessible at https://
www.sec.gov/spotlight/fairvalue.htm.
The Commission welcomes feedback
regarding any of the topics to be
addressed at the roundtable.
DATES: Comments should be received on
or before October 28, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted by any of the following
methods:
(202) 551–5300, Office of the Chief
Accountant, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–6561.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Commission welcomes feedback
regarding any of the topics to be
addressed at the roundtable. The panel
discussions will focus on:
• The effects of mark-to-market
accounting on financial reporting by
financial institutions.
• Potential market behavior effects
from mark-to-market accounting.
• The usefulness of mark-to-market
accounting to investors and regulators.
• Aspects of the current accounting
standards that can be improved.
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
submission form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/other.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number 4–573 on the subject line.
[Release No. 34–58814; File No. SR–Amex–
2008–53]
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Florence Harmon, Acting Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File No.
4–573. This file number should be
included on the subject line if e-mail is
used. To help us 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/other.shtml).
Comments also will be available for
public 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 a.m. and 3 p.m.
All comments received will be posted
without change; we do not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bert
Fox or Liza McAndrew Moberg,
Professional Accounting Fellows, at
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
By the Commission.
Dated: October 20, 2008.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–25387 Filed 10–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
American Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Approval of Proposed Rule
Change Related to Amendments to
Rule 925 (Confirmations) and Rule 921
(Opening of Accounts)
October 20, 2008.
On June 26, 2008, the American Stock
Exchange LLC (the ‘‘Amex’’ or the
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) a proposed rule change
pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder.2 Notice of the proposal was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on September 12, 2008.3 The
Commission received no comments on
the proposed rule change. This order
approves the proposed rule change.
I. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
The Exchange proposed to amend
Amex Rule 925 to clarify that written
confirmations relating to options
transactions are not required to specify
the options exchange or exchanges on
which such options contracts were
executed. The Exchange further
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58466
(Sept. 5, 2008) 73 FR 53057 (Sept. 12, 2008).
2 17
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
63528
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Notices
proposed to amend Amex Rule 921 to
permit a General Securities Sales
Supervisor to approve the opening of an
options account.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
A. Options Confirmation Rule (Rule
925)
Amex Rule 925 requires that every
member and member organization
promptly furnish to each customer a
written confirmation of each options
transaction for such customer’s account.
This confirmation is required to disclose
the type of option, the underlying
security, the expiration month, the
exercise price, the number of option
contracts, the premium, commissions,
the transaction and settlement dates,
whether the transaction was a purchase
or a sale (writing) transaction, whether
the transaction was an opening or a
closing transaction, and whether the
transaction was effected on a principal
or agency basis. In addition, Rule 925
requires that each confirmation, by
appropriate symbols, must distinguish
between Exchange option transactions
and other transactions in option
contracts and between such transactions
and transactions in other options. Rule
925 has been interpreted over the years
by market participants to require that
written confirmations relating to options
transactions specify the options
exchange or exchanges on which such
options contracts were executed. This
proposal seeks to clarify that Rule 925
does not require the name of the options
exchange or exchanges on which an
options contract is executed.
Prior to August 1999, an options class
was typically listed on only one options
exchange. In August 1999, the options
exchanges began to multiply-list options
classes that were previously listed on
only one exchange. In October 1999, the
Commission stated that it believed a
linkage among options markets would
benefit investors by increasing
competition among markets (and market
participants) to provide the best
execution of customer orders.4
Subsequently, the Commission directed
the options exchanges to act jointly in
discussing, developing, and submitting
for Commission approval an intermarket
linkage plan for multiply-traded
options. On July 28, 2000, the
Commission approved the Plan for the
Purpose of Creating and Operating an
Intermarket Options Market Linkage
(the ‘‘Options Linkage Plan’’ or
‘‘Linkage Plan’’) submitted by the Amex,
the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Inc., and the International Securities
4 See Exchange Act Release No. 42029 (Oct. 19,
1999), 64 FR 57674 (Oct. 26, 1999).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Oct 23, 2008
Jkt 217001
Exchange, Inc.5 The Philadelphia Stock
Exchange, Inc., and the Pacific Stock
Exchange agreed to participate in the
Options Linkage Plan in November
2000.6 As a result of the introduction of
multiple trading of options and the
implementation of the Linkage Plan, the
contracts in a customer options order
could be executed on more than one
options exchange and the significance of
the options exchange or exchanges that
execute a particular options transaction
has diminished significantly.7
Under the duty of best execution,
Amex members are required to exercise
diligence to obtain the best price when
routing customer options trades for
execution. The Exchange, as well as the
other members of the Options Self
Regulatory Council (the ‘‘OSRC’’),8
believes that in light of the existing best
execution and disclosure requirements,
the usefulness of including on an
options confirmation the name of the
options exchange or exchanges on
which an options transaction was
effected does not outweigh the
operational difficulties of capturing the
information given the multiple trading
of options and the application of the
Options Linkage Plan industry-wide.
Consequently, the proposal would
amend Amex Rule 925 to make clear
that written confirmations relating to
options transactions are not required to
specify the options exchange or
exchanges on which such options
contracts were executed.
B. Options Account Opening Rule (Rule
921)
Amex Rule 921 governs the opening
of options accounts by members and
member organizations. Specifically,
Rule 921(c), relating to ‘‘Diligence in
Opening Account,’’ provides that in
approving a customer’s account for
options transactions, a member or
member organization shall exercise due
diligence to learn the essential facts as
to the customer and his investment
objectives and financial situation, and
shall make a record of such information
(which shall be retained in accordance
with Amex Rule 922). Based on such
5 See Exchange Act Release No. 43086 (Jul. 28,
2000), 65 FR 48023 (Aug. 4, 2000).
6 See Exchange Act Release Nos. 43573 (Nov. 16,
2000), 65 FR 70850 (Nov. 28, 2000) and 43574 (Nov.
16, 2000), 65 FR 70851 (Nov. 28, 2000) (approval
order).
7 Modifications to this paragraph discussed in
telephone conference between Jeffrey P. Burns,
Vice-President & Associate General Counsel,
American Stock Exchange LLC, and Max Welsh,
Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets,
Securities and Exchange Commission, on August 7,
2008.
8 The ORSC consists of the options exchanges and
the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(‘‘FINRA’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
information, the branch manager or
other registered options principal
(‘‘ROP’’) is required to approve in
writing the customer’s account for
options transactions. If the branch
manager is not a ROP, the branch
manager’s approval of the account must
be confirmed within a reasonable time
by a ROP. The Exchange and the other
members of the ORSC believe that an
amendment to the current options
account opening procedures is
warranted so that a general securities
sales supervisor, in addition to a ROP,
is able to open an options account
without the approval of a ROP. The
other members of the ORSC are also
expected to file similar amendments to
their options account opening rules.
The Exchange believes that permitting
a general securities sales supervisor to
approve the opening of an options
account would be appropriate and
would properly reflects the maturity of
the options market and the manner in
which the uses of options are more
integrated with other securities in the
implementation of investment
strategies.9 In particular, the Exchange
believes that the proposed amendment
to Rule 921 would further permit
member firms to integrate their options
activities into their overall supervisory
and compliance structures that monitor
all securities products.
II. Discussion and Findings
After careful review of the proposed
rule change, the Commission finds that
the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6 of the Exchange Act,10 in
general, and furthers the objectives of
section 6(b)(5),11 in particular, in that it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of
trade and to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities.
The Commission also finds that the
proposed rule change is designed to
remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the
9 The Commission recently approved the
elimination of the Senior Registered Options
Principal (‘‘SROP’’) and Compliance Registered
Options Principal (‘‘CROP’’) supervisory categories,
permitting member firms to supervise their options
activities through their overall supervisory and
compliance programs that monitor all other
securities products. See Exchange Act Release No.
57738 (April 29, 2008), 73 FR 25805 (May 7, 2008)
(approval order).
10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposal, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule’s
impact on efficiency, competition and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 207 / Friday, October 24, 2008 / Notices
public interest, by clarifying options
confirmation and account opening
procedure rules to better reflect the
realities of the modern options market
and the compliance and regulatory
structures adopted by firms. The
Commission believes that the proposal
is consistent with section 6(b)(5)
Exchange Act because the proposed
amendments to Amex Rules 925 and
921 better reflect the manner in which
standardized options are listed and
traded on the options exchanges and
integrated into firms’ general securities
supervision and compliance programs.
III. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
section 19(b)(2) of the Act,12 that the
proposed rule change (SR–Amex–2008–
53) be, and hereby is, approved.
For the Commission by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.13
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–25371 Filed 10–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–58776; File No. SR–BATS–
2008–007]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS
Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend BATS Rule
11.13, Entitled ‘‘Order Execution’’
October 14, 2008.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
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 October
10, 2008, BATS Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BATS’’
or the ‘‘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 prepared
by the Exchange. BATS has designated
the proposed rule change as constituting
a non-controversial rule change under
Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the Act,3 which
renders the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. BATS has
also requested that the Commission
waive the 30-day pre-operative waiting
period contained in Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii)
under the Act.4 If such waiver is granted
12 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
4 Id.
13 17
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Oct 23, 2008
by the Commission, the Exchange will
implement this rule proposal
immediately upon commencement of its
operations as a national securities
exchange. 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 is proposing to amend
BATS Rule 11.13, entitled ‘‘Order
Execution,’’ to more closely mirror the
rules of other self-regulatory
organizations related to order routing
and to provide the Exchange’s
Outbound Router (as defined below)
with additional flexibility when routing
orders away from the Exchange.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available at the Exchange’s Web site
at https://www.batstrading.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the 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. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant parts of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The routing performed in connection
with the operation of the Exchange will
be conducted by an affiliate of the
Exchange, BATS Trading, Inc. (the
‘‘Outbound Router’’), which is regulated
as a facility of the Exchange (as defined
in Section 3(a)(2) of the Act),5 subject to
Section 6 of the Act.6 The role and
functions of the Outbound Router are
set forth in BATS Rule 2.11, which has
previously been approved by the
Commission.
The purpose of the proposed rule
change is to provide the Exchange’s
Outbound Router with additional
flexibility when routing orders away
5 15
6 15
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78c(a)(2).
U.S.C. 78f.
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63529
from the Exchange. The proposed
modifications will permit the Outbound
Router to route to additional Trading
Centers (as defined in Exchange Rule
2.11),7 without limiting the permissible
destinations to execution venues with
‘‘protected quotations’’ (as defined in
Rule 600(b)(58) of the Act).8 Under the
proposed rule, orders could be routed to
one or more Trading Centers provided
that such routing is compliant with
Regulation NMS, specifically, Rule 611
thereof (the ‘‘Order Protection Rule’’).9
Such Trading Centers may include
execution venues known as ‘‘dark
books.’’
Under current Rule 11.13, when an
incoming market or marketable limit
order is received by the Exchange, the
order will first check the BATS Book. If
such order is not executed in full
against liquidity on the BATS Book, and
is eligible for routing based on the
User’s instructions, then the order will
be transmitted to the Outbound Router
to be routed away. The Outbound
Router will then route the order to one
or more protected quotations for
potential execution in compliance with
the Order Protection Rule of Regulation
NMS. This process continues until the
order has been executed in full or the
Outbound Router has confirmed that
there are no available protected
quotations at the routed price level or at
a better price level. Following the
routing process described above, the
order will return to the Exchange to
check available liquidity at the next
permissible price level, and, if not
executed in full, will either be posted to
the BATS Book or again routed away to
protected quotations at that next
permissible price level.
After the proposed rule change, the
Order Router may route orders not only
to protected quotations, but also to other
Trading Centers, so long as such routing
is in compliance with the Order
Protection Rule of Regulation NMS.
With the exception of this proposed
change, the order routing process will
continue as it does currently. Thus,
orders will continue to be routed in the
order routing process until the order has
been executed in full or the Outbound
Router has confirmed that there are no
available protected quotations at the
routed price level or at a better price
level. The order will then return to the
Exchange to check available liquidity at
the next permissible price level, and, if
not executed in full, will either be
7 The Exchange’s definition of Trading Center,
contained in Rule 2.11, is consistent with the
definition of ‘‘trading center’’ contained in Rule
600(b)(78) of Regulation NMS.
8 17 CFR 242.600(b)(58).
9 17 CFR 242.611.
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 207 (Friday, October 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63527-63529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25371]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-58814; File No. SR-Amex-2008-53]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change Related to Amendments to Rule
925 (Confirmations) and Rule 921 (Opening of Accounts)
October 20, 2008.
On June 26, 2008, the American Stock Exchange LLC (the ``Amex'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder.\2\ Notice of the proposal was published for comment
in the Federal Register on September 12, 2008.\3\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposed rule change. This order approves
the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58466 (Sept. 5,
2008) 73 FR 53057 (Sept. 12, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Description of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposed to amend Amex Rule 925 to clarify that
written confirmations relating to options transactions are not required
to specify the options exchange or exchanges on which such options
contracts were executed. The Exchange further
[[Page 63528]]
proposed to amend Amex Rule 921 to permit a General Securities Sales
Supervisor to approve the opening of an options account.
A. Options Confirmation Rule (Rule 925)
Amex Rule 925 requires that every member and member organization
promptly furnish to each customer a written confirmation of each
options transaction for such customer's account. This confirmation is
required to disclose the type of option, the underlying security, the
expiration month, the exercise price, the number of option contracts,
the premium, commissions, the transaction and settlement dates, whether
the transaction was a purchase or a sale (writing) transaction, whether
the transaction was an opening or a closing transaction, and whether
the transaction was effected on a principal or agency basis. In
addition, Rule 925 requires that each confirmation, by appropriate
symbols, must distinguish between Exchange option transactions and
other transactions in option contracts and between such transactions
and transactions in other options. Rule 925 has been interpreted over
the years by market participants to require that written confirmations
relating to options transactions specify the options exchange or
exchanges on which such options contracts were executed. This proposal
seeks to clarify that Rule 925 does not require the name of the options
exchange or exchanges on which an options contract is executed.
Prior to August 1999, an options class was typically listed on only
one options exchange. In August 1999, the options exchanges began to
multiply-list options classes that were previously listed on only one
exchange. In October 1999, the Commission stated that it believed a
linkage among options markets would benefit investors by increasing
competition among markets (and market participants) to provide the best
execution of customer orders.\4\ Subsequently, the Commission directed
the options exchanges to act jointly in discussing, developing, and
submitting for Commission approval an intermarket linkage plan for
multiply-traded options. On July 28, 2000, the Commission approved the
Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Options
Market Linkage (the ``Options Linkage Plan'' or ``Linkage Plan'')
submitted by the Amex, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., and
the International Securities Exchange, Inc.\5\ The Philadelphia Stock
Exchange, Inc., and the Pacific Stock Exchange agreed to participate in
the Options Linkage Plan in November 2000.\6\ As a result of the
introduction of multiple trading of options and the implementation of
the Linkage Plan, the contracts in a customer options order could be
executed on more than one options exchange and the significance of the
options exchange or exchanges that execute a particular options
transaction has diminished significantly.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 42029 (Oct. 19, 1999), 64 FR
57674 (Oct. 26, 1999).
\5\ See Exchange Act Release No. 43086 (Jul. 28, 2000), 65 FR
48023 (Aug. 4, 2000).
\6\ See Exchange Act Release Nos. 43573 (Nov. 16, 2000), 65 FR
70850 (Nov. 28, 2000) and 43574 (Nov. 16, 2000), 65 FR 70851 (Nov.
28, 2000) (approval order).
\7\ Modifications to this paragraph discussed in telephone
conference between Jeffrey P. Burns, Vice-President & Associate
General Counsel, American Stock Exchange LLC, and Max Welsh, Special
Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets, Securities and Exchange
Commission, on August 7, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the duty of best execution, Amex members are required to
exercise diligence to obtain the best price when routing customer
options trades for execution. The Exchange, as well as the other
members of the Options Self Regulatory Council (the ``OSRC''),\8\
believes that in light of the existing best execution and disclosure
requirements, the usefulness of including on an options confirmation
the name of the options exchange or exchanges on which an options
transaction was effected does not outweigh the operational difficulties
of capturing the information given the multiple trading of options and
the application of the Options Linkage Plan industry-wide.
Consequently, the proposal would amend Amex Rule 925 to make clear that
written confirmations relating to options transactions are not required
to specify the options exchange or exchanges on which such options
contracts were executed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The ORSC consists of the options exchanges and the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Options Account Opening Rule (Rule 921)
Amex Rule 921 governs the opening of options accounts by members
and member organizations. Specifically, Rule 921(c), relating to
``Diligence in Opening Account,'' provides that in approving a
customer's account for options transactions, a member or member
organization shall exercise due diligence to learn the essential facts
as to the customer and his investment objectives and financial
situation, and shall make a record of such information (which shall be
retained in accordance with Amex Rule 922). Based on such information,
the branch manager or other registered options principal (``ROP'') is
required to approve in writing the customer's account for options
transactions. If the branch manager is not a ROP, the branch manager's
approval of the account must be confirmed within a reasonable time by a
ROP. The Exchange and the other members of the ORSC believe that an
amendment to the current options account opening procedures is
warranted so that a general securities sales supervisor, in addition to
a ROP, is able to open an options account without the approval of a
ROP. The other members of the ORSC are also expected to file similar
amendments to their options account opening rules.
The Exchange believes that permitting a general securities sales
supervisor to approve the opening of an options account would be
appropriate and would properly reflects the maturity of the options
market and the manner in which the uses of options are more integrated
with other securities in the implementation of investment
strategies.\9\ In particular, the Exchange believes that the proposed
amendment to Rule 921 would further permit member firms to integrate
their options activities into their overall supervisory and compliance
structures that monitor all securities products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The Commission recently approved the elimination of the
Senior Registered Options Principal (``SROP'') and Compliance
Registered Options Principal (``CROP'') supervisory categories,
permitting member firms to supervise their options activities
through their overall supervisory and compliance programs that
monitor all other securities products. See Exchange Act Release No.
57738 (April 29, 2008), 73 FR 25805 (May 7, 2008) (approval order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion and Findings
After careful review of the proposed rule change, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6 of the
Exchange Act,\10\ in general, and furthers the objectives of section
6(b)(5),\11\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade and to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities. The Commission also finds that the proposed rule change is
designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the
[[Page 63529]]
public interest, by clarifying options confirmation and account opening
procedure rules to better reflect the realities of the modern options
market and the compliance and regulatory structures adopted by firms.
The Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with section
6(b)(5) Exchange Act because the proposed amendments to Amex Rules 925
and 921 better reflect the manner in which standardized options are
listed and traded on the options exchanges and integrated into firms'
general securities supervision and compliance programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposal, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
\11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\12\ that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2008-53) be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-25371 Filed 10-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P