Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Registered Representative Fee and an Options Regulatory Fee, 63744-63747 [E8-25502]
Download as PDF
63744
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 208 / Monday, October 27, 2008 / Notices
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 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the BSE. 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–BSE–2008–47 and should
be submitted on or before November 17,
2008.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.17
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–25536 Filed 10–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
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
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (‘‘CBOE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’)
proposes to amend its Fees Schedule to
eliminate registered representative fees
and institute a new transaction-based
‘‘Options Regulatory Fee.’’ The text of
the proposed rule change is available on
the Exchange’s Web site (https://
www.cboe.org/legal), at the Exchange’s
Office of the Secretary 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,
CBOE 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. CBOE 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
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–58817; File No. SR–CBOE–
2008–105]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to the
Registered Representative Fee and an
Options Regulatory Fee
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
October 20, 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 October
14, 2008, the Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II and III
below, which Items have been prepared
by CBOE. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
17 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:13 Oct 24, 2008
Jkt 217001
Background
Registered representative fees (‘‘RR
Fees’’) as well as other regulatory fees
collected by the Exchange are intended
to cover a portion of the cost of the
Exchange’s regulatory programs.3 The
Exchange has assessed RR Fees since
1990. Each CBOE member firm that
registers a financial advisor (or
registered representative), Registered
Options Principal or Financial/
Operations Principal is assessed RR
Fees based on the action associated with
the registration. There are annual fees as
well as initial, transfer and termination
fees.4 Today all options exchanges,
regardless of size, charge similar
registered representative fees.
Some member firms have raised
concerns that the current self-regulatory
organization (‘‘SRO’’) regulatory fee
structure, in which every options
3 In addition to RR Fees, CBOE derives revenue
associated with its regulatory programs from
Designated Examining Authority (‘‘DEA’’) Fees and
Communication Review Fees. These fees are
discussed further below.
4 See Section 12(A) of the CBOE Fees Schedule
and CBOE Rule 2.22.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
exchange charges similar fees to their
member firms, does not appear justified.
Each RR Fee is a fixed amount of money
a member firm pays to the Exchange for
each registered representative within
the firm. The Exchange believes that RR
Fees are no longer the most equitable
manner to assess regulatory fees because
today there are more Internet and
discount brokerage firms with few
registered representatives that pay little
in RR Fees and fewer traditional
brokerage firms with many registered
representatives. The regulatory effort the
Exchange expends to review the
transactions of each type of firm is not
commensurate with the number of
registered representatives that each firm
employs.
In addition, due to the manner in
which RR Fees are charged, it is
possible for a member firm to
restructure its business to avoid paying
these fees altogether. A firm can avoid
RR Fees by terminating its CBOE
membership and sending its business to
the Exchange through another member
firm, even an affiliated firm that has
many fewer registered representatives. If
member firms terminated their
memberships to avoid RR Fees, the
Exchange would suffer the loss of a
major source of funding for its
regulatory programs. The Exchange
notes that one member firm has already
terminated its membership to avoid RR
Fees. The Exchange believes other firms
will do the same unless the Exchange
changes it regulatory fee structure.
Options Regulatory Fee
In order to address the concerns
raised by member firms and to avoid the
possibility of losing significant
regulatory fee revenue, the Exchange
proposes to eliminate RR Fees and
replace them with a transaction-based
‘‘Options Regulatory Fee’’ (‘‘ORF’’). The
ORF would be $.0045 per contract and
would be assessed by the Exchange to
each member for all options transactions
executed by the member that are cleared
by The Options Clearing Corporation
(‘‘OCC’’) in the customer range (i.e., that
clear in the customer account of the
member’s clearing firm at OCC),
excluding P/A Orders as defined in the
Options Intermarket Linkage Plan
(‘‘Linkage’’). The ORF would be
imposed upon all such transactions
executed by a member, even if such
transactions do not take place on the
Exchange.5 The ORF would be collected
5 The ORF would apply to all ‘‘B’’, ‘‘C’’, and ‘‘W’’
account origin code orders executed by a member
on the Exchange. CBOE order origin codes are
defined in CBOE Regulatory Circular RG08–105.
Exchange rules require each member to record the
appropriate account origin code on all orders at the
E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM
27OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 208 / Monday, October 27, 2008 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
indirectly from members through their
clearing firms by OCC on behalf of the
Exchange.
The ORF would become effective on
January 1, 2009, at which time RR Fees
would be eliminated. The ORF is
designed to recover a portion of the
costs to the Exchange of the supervision
and regulation of its members, including
performing routine surveillances,
investigations, examinations, financial
monitoring, and policy, rulemaking,
interpretive, and enforcement activities.
The Exchange has set the ORF at a rate
that it anticipates will approximately
replace the amount of revenue that
would be lost from the elimination of
RR Fees.
The ORF would not be charged for
member options transactions because
members incur the costs of owning
memberships and through their
memberships are charged transaction
fees, dues and other fees that are not
applicable to non-members.6 The dues
and fees paid by members go into the
general funds of the Exchange, a portion
of which is used to help pay the costs
of regulation. Thus, the Exchange
believes members are already paying
their fair share of the costs of
regulation.7 Moreover, because the ORF
would replace RR Fees, which relate to
a member’s customer business, the
Exchange believes it is appropriate to
charge the ORF only to transactions that
clear as customer at the OCC.
The Exchange expects that member
firms will pass-through the ORF to their
customers in the same manner that
firms pass-through to their customers
the fees charged by SROs to help the
SROs meet their obligation under
Section 31 of the Exchange Act.
The Exchange believes that revenue
generated from the ORF, when
combined with all of the Exchange’s
other regulatory fees, will be less than
or equal to the Exchange’s regulatory
costs. The total amount of regulatory
fees collected by the Exchange is
significantly less than the regulatory
costs incurred by the Exchange on an
annual basis. In general, on a year over
year basis, regulatory fee revenue (not
time of entry in order to allow the Exchange to
properly prioritize and route orders and assess
transaction fees pursuant to the rules of the
Exchange and report resulting transactions to the
OCC. The Exchange represents that it has
surveillances in place to verify that members mark
orders with the correct account origin code.
6 For example, non-broker-dealer customers
generally are not charged transaction fees to trade
equity options on the Exchange.
7 If the Exchange changes its method of funding
regulation or if circumstances otherwise change in
the future, the Exchange may decide to impose the
ORF or a separate regulatory fee on members if the
Exchange deems it advisable.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:13 Oct 24, 2008
Jkt 217001
including regulatory fine revenue) only
covers about 65% of the Exchange’s
regulatory costs.
RR Fees make up the largest part of
the Exchange’s total regulatory fee
revenue. The Exchange collects other
regulatory revenues from DEA Fees,8
and Communication Review Fees.9 The
Exchange notes that its regulatory
responsibilities with respect to member
compliance with options sales practice
rules have been allocated to FINRA
under a 17d–2 agreement. The ORF is
not designed to cover the cost of options
sales practice regulation.
The Exchange would monitor the
amount of revenue collected from the
ORF to ensure that it, in combination
with its other regulatory fees and fines,
does not exceed regulatory costs. The
Exchange expects to monitor regulatory
costs and revenues at a minimum on an
annual basis. If the Exchange
determines regulatory revenues exceed
regulatory costs, the Exchange would
adjust the ORF by submitting a fee
change filing to the Commission. The
Exchange would notify members of
adjustments to the ORF via regulatory
circular.
The Exchange believes the proposed
ORF is equitably allocated because it
would be charged to all members on all
their customer options business (as
defined above). The Exchange believes
the proposed ORF is reasonable because
it will raise revenue related to the
amount of customer options business
conducted by members, and thus the
amount of Exchange regulatory services
those members will require, instead of
how many registered persons a
particular member firm employs.10
The Exchange believes it is reasonable
and appropriate for the Exchange to
charge the ORF for options transactions
regardless of the exchange on which the
transactions occur. The Exchange has a
statutory obligation to enforce
8 The Exchange assesses the DEA Fee to each firm
for which the SEC has designated the Exchange to
be the DEA pursuant to SEC Rule 17d–1. The DEA
Fee is intended to reimburse the Exchange for its
costs associated with examining member firms and
is generally the same throughout the SRO
community. Currently the rate is set at $0.40 per
$1,000.00 of gross revenue for the firm. See Section
12(C) of the CBOE Fees Schedule.
9 Although the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (‘‘FINRA’’) is the SRO that reviews most
securities industry advertisements and other
communications, a number of firms still prefer to
have CBOE review their materials. These requests
are charged at $150 per regular occurrence (unless
it involves extended review, such as a book) and
$1,000 for an expedited, two-day turnaround. See
Section 12(E) of the CBOE Fees Schedule.
10 The Exchange expects that implementation of
the proposed ORF will result generally in many
traditional brokerage firms paying less regulatory
fees while Internet and discount brokerage firms
will pay more.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63745
compliance by its members and their
associated persons with the Exchange
Act and the rules of the Exchange and
to surveil for other manipulative
conduct by market participants
(including non-members) trading on the
Exchange. The Exchange cannot
effectively surveil for such conduct
without looking at and evaluating
activity across all options markets.
Many of the Exchange’s market
surveillance programs require the
Exchange to look at and evaluate
activity across all options markets, such
as surveillance for position limit
violations, manipulation, insider
trading, frontrunning, contrary exercise
advice violations and locked/crossed
markets in connection with the
Linkage.11 Also, CBOE and the other
options exchanges are required to
populate a consolidated options audit
trail (‘‘COATS’’) system in order to
surveil member activities across
markets.12
In addition to its own surveillance
programs, the Exchange works with
other SROs and exchanges on
intermarket surveillance related
issues.13 Through its participation in the
Intermarket Surveillance Group (‘‘ISG’’)
the Exchange shares information and
coordinates inquiries and investigations
with other exchanges designed to
address potential intermarket
11 The Exchange and other options SROs are
parties to a 17d–2 agreement allocating among the
SROs regulatory responsibilities relating to
compliance by their common members with rules
for expiring exercise declarations (formerly known
as contrary exercise advices). See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 56941 (December 11,
2007), 72 FR 71723 (December 18, 2007). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57649 (April
11, 2008), 73 FR 20976 (April 17, 2008) (approving
an amendment which sought to add The Nasdaq
Stock Market, LLC as a participant to such
agreement). The Exchange and other options SROs
have recently filed with the Commission an
amendment to this agreement to include the
allocation of examination responsibility with
respect to options position limits. The Exchange
retains significant regulatory responsibilities under
this agreement. The Exchange notes within the last
year it brought charges against members in two
separate cases relating to member activity on CBOE
as well as on another exchange. One case involved
a contrary exercise advice violation and the other
a position limit violation.
12 COATS effectively enhances intermarket
options surveillance by enabling the options
exchanges to reconstruct markets promptly,
effectively surveil them and enforce order handling,
firm quote, trade reporting and other rules.
13 Recently the Exchange, at the direction of the
SEC, led a sweep examination of member firms
relating to compliance with Regulation SHO that
involved reviewing data with respect to members of
other exchanges and coordinating such reviews
with other exchanges. As a result of this
examination, the Exchange has been assisting
FINRA with a Regulation SHO review of a firm for
which the Exchange is not the DEA.
E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM
27OCN1
63746
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 208 / Monday, October 27, 2008 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
manipulation and trading abuses.14 The
Exchange’s participation in ISG helps it
to satisfy the Exchange Act requirement
that it have coordinated surveillance
with markets on which security futures
are traded and markets on which any
security underlying security futures are
traded to detect manipulation and
insider trading.15
The Exchange believes that charging
the ORF across markets will avoid
having members direct their trades to
other markets in order to avoid the fee
and to thereby avoid paying for their fair
share of regulation. If the ORF did not
apply to activity across markets, then
members would send their orders to the
least cost, least regulated exchange.
Other exchanges would, of course, be
free to impose a similar fee on their
member’s activity, including the activity
of those members on CBOE.
Finally, there is established precedent
for an SRO charging a fee across
markets, namely, FINRA’s Trading
Activity Fee.16 While the Exchange does
not have all of the same regulatory
responsibilities as FINRA, the Exchange
believes (as described above) that its
broad regulatory responsibilities with
respect to its members’ activities,
irrespective of where their transactions
take place, supports a regulatory fee
applicable to transactions on other
markets. Unlike the TAF, the ORF
would apply only to a member’s
customer options transactions.
Related Rule Text Changes: In
addition to being set forth in Section 12
of the CBOE Fees Schedule, DEA Fees
and RR Fees are also set forth in CBOE
Rules 2.22(a) and (b), respectively. The
Exchange proposes to delete paragraph
(b) from Rule 2.22 to reflect the
elimination of RR Fees. The Exchange
proposes to delete paragraph (a) from
Rule 2.22 relating to DEA Fees because
the Exchange does not believe it is
necessary for those fees to be set forth
in the rule since they are included on
the CBOE Fees Schedule. Also, as a
housekeeping matter, the Exchange
proposes to delete Interpretation and
Policy .01 to Rule 2.22 because it relates
to charges imposed for services
rendered by Order Book Officials
(‘‘OBOs’’) and the Exchange no longer
employs OBOs.
14 ISG is an industry organization formed in 1983
to coordinate intermarket surveillance among the
SROs by cooperatively sharing regulatory
information pursuant to a written agreement
between the parties. The goal of the ISG’s
information sharing is to coordinate regulatory
efforts to address potential intermarket trading
abuses and manipulations.
15 See Exchange Act Section 6(h)(3)(I).
16 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47946
(May 30, 2003), 68 FR 34021 (June 6, 2003).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:13 Oct 24, 2008
Jkt 217001
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (‘‘Act’’),17 in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) 18 of the
Act in particular, in that it is designed
to provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among its members and other persons
using its facilities. The Exchange
believes that the ORF is objectively
allocated to CBOE members because it
would be charged to all members on all
their transactions that clear as customer
at the OCC. Moreover, the Exchange
believes the ORF ensures fairness by
assessing higher fees to those member
firms that require more Exchange
regulatory services based on the amount
of customer options business they
conduct.
The Exchange believes the initial
level of the fee is reasonable because it
relates to the recovery of the costs of
supervising and regulating members and
it is expected to equal the Exchange’s
revenue from RR Fees for 2007. The
Exchange notes that the Commission
has addressed the funding of an SRO’s
regulatory operations in the Concept
Release Concerning Self-Regulation 19
and the release on the Fair
Administration and Governance of SelfRegulatory Organizations.20 In the
Concept Release, the Commission states
that: ‘‘Given the inherent tension
between an SRO’s role as a business and
as a regulator, there undoubtedly is a
temptation for an SRO to fund the
business side of its operations at the
expense of regulation.’’ 21 In order to
address this potential conflict, the
Commission proposed in the
Governance Release rules that would
require an SRO to direct monies
collected from regulatory fees, fines, or
penalties exclusively to fund the
regulatory operations and other
programs of the SRO related to its
regulatory responsibilities.22 The
Exchange has designed the ORF to
generate revenues that, when combined
with all of the Exchange’s other
regulatory fees, will be less than or
equal to the Exchange’s regulatory costs,
which is consistent with the
Commission’s view that regulatory fees
17 15
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
19 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50700
(November 18, 2004), 69 FR 71256 (December 8,
2004) (‘‘Concept Release’’).
20 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50699
(November 18, 2004), 69 FR 71126 (December 8,
2004) (‘‘Governance Release’’).
21 Concept Release at 71268.
22 Governance Release at 71142.
18 15
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
be used for regulatory purposes and not
to support the Exchange’s business side.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
CBOE 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 solicited
or received with respect to the proposed
rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
of the Act 23 and subparagraph (f)(2) of
Rule 19b–4 24 thereunder. At any time
within 60 days of the filing of the
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.
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 rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–CBOE–2008–105 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2008–105. 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
23 15
24 17
E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
27OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 208 / Monday, October 27, 2008 / Notices
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 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at
the principal office of the Exchange. 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 publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2008–105 and
should be submitted on or before
November 17, 2008.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.25
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–25502 Filed 10–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–58823; File No. SR–CBOE–
2007–30]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Granting Approval
of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified
by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, Relating
to Amendments to Rule 9.21
(Communications to Customers)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
October 21, 2008.
On March 19, 2007, the Chicago
Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(‘‘CBOE’’ or ‘‘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
(‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1, and Rule 19b–4
thereunder.2 CBOE filed Amendment
25 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:13 Oct 24, 2008
Jkt 217001
No. 1 to the proposed rule change on
June 9, 2008.3 Notice of the proposal, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on July 17, 2008.4 The
Commission received one comment
letter regarding the proposed rule
change 5 and a response to comments
from CBOE.6 This order approves the
proposed rule change.
I. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
On December 23, 2002, the
Commission published final rules that
exempt standardized options, as defined
in Rule 9b–1 7 under the Exchange Act,
that are issued by a registered clearing
agency and traded on a registered
national securities exchange or on a
registered national securities
association, from all provisions of the
Securities Act (other than the anti-fraud
provisions) and the registration
requirements of the Exchange Act.8
Because the Securities Act of 1933
(‘‘Securities Act’’) 9 and the rules
thereunder (other than the anti-fraud
provisions) are no longer applicable to
such standardized options, CBOE
proposed to remove elements of the
Securities Act that are embedded in
CBOE Rule 9.21 (‘‘Communications to
Customers’’). In particular, CBOE
proposed to remove all references to a
‘‘prospectus’’ from Rule 9.21.
Prospectuses are no longer required for
such standardized options, and the
Options Clearing Corporation has, in
fact, ceased publication of a
prospectus.10 In addition, the proposed
amendments expand the types of
communications governed by Rule 9.21
to include independently prepared
reprints and other communications
between a member or member
organization and a customer, exempt
certain options communications from
3 Amendment No. 1 replaces the original filing in
its entirety.
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58138
(Jul. 10, 2008) 73 FR 40886 (Jul. 17, 2008) (SR–
CBOE–2007–30) (notice).
5 See Letter from Melissa MacGregor, Vice
President and Assistant General Counsel, Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association
(‘‘SIFMA’’), dated July 31, 2008.
6 See Letter from Lawrence J. Bresnahan, Vice
President, CBOE, dated September 30, 2008.
7 17 CFR 240.9b–1.
8 See ‘‘Exemption for Standardized Options From
Provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 and From
the Registration Requirements of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; Final Rule,’’ Securities Act
Release No. 8171 and Exchange Act Release No.
47082 (Dec. 23, 2002), 68 FR 188 (Jan. 2, 2003).
9 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.
10 The options disclosure document (‘‘ODD’’)
prepared in accordance with Rule 9b–1 under the
Exchange Act is not deemed to be a prospectus. 17
CFR 230.135b. See, e.g., Securities Act Release No.
8049 (Dec. 21, 2001), 67 FR 228 (Jan. 2, 2002).
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63747
the pre-approval requirement by a
Registered Options Principal (‘‘ROP’’)
and update and reorganize Rule 9.21.
The proposed amendments are similar
to amendments filed with the
Commission by the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’).11
A. Deletion of Certain Provisions
As noted above, CBOE Rule 9.21
contains a number of references to a
prospectus and other Securities Act
requirements. The Exchange proposed
to delete the following from Rule 9.21:
(1) Rule 9.21(a)(iv), which references
the Securities Act definition of
prospectus,
(2) Rule 9.21(d), which incorporates
Securities Act principles in that it
prohibits written material concerning
options from being furnished to any
person who has not previously or
contemporaneously received the ODD,
(3) Rule 9.21(e)(ii), which defines the
term ‘‘Educational Material,’’ 12
(4) Interpretation and Policy .02A of
Rule 9.21, which outlines what is
permitted in an ‘‘Advertisement,’’ 13 and
(5) Interpretation and Policy .03 of
Rule 9.21, which concerns educational
material.14
B. Redesignation of Rule 9.21(a) to
Proposed Rule 9.21(d) and Related
Amendments
Rule 9.21(a) currently contains an
outline of the ‘‘General Rule’’ for
options communications. CBOE
proposed to redesignate paragraph (a) as
paragraph (d), and to incorporate
limitations on the use of options
communications contained in
Interpretations and Policies .01 of Rule
9.21 into proposed Rule 9.21(d). In
addition, proposed Rule 9.21(d)(iii)
would amend Rule 9.21(a)(iii) by
clarifying the types of cautionary
statements and caveats that are
prohibited. Also, as previously noted,
CBOE proposed to delete Rule
9.21(a)(iv).
C. Proposed Amendments to Rule
9.21(b)
CBOE proposed to amend Rule 9.21(b)
to include the types of communications
11 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57720
(Apr. 25, 2008) 73 FR 24332 (May 2, 2008),
Exchange Act Release No. 58738 (approval order)
(Oct. 6, 2008) 73 FR 60371 (Oct. 10, 2008) (SR–
FINRA–2008–13).
12 This paragraph essentially incorporates
language of Securities Act Rule 134a. While this
amendment would eliminate the separate
educational material category, as discussed below
the Exchange also proposed to revise the definition
of Sales Literature to include educational material.
13 This paragraph essentially incorporates
language of Securities Act Rule 134.
14 See note 12, supra.
E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM
27OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 208 (Monday, October 27, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63744-63747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25502]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-58817; File No. SR-CBOE-2008-105]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to the Registered Representative Fee and an
Options Regulatory Fee
October 20, 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 October 14, 2008, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by CBOE. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE'' or
``Exchange'') proposes to amend its Fees Schedule to eliminate
registered representative fees and institute a new transaction-based
``Options Regulatory Fee.'' The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site (https://www.cboe.org/legal), at
the Exchange's Office of the Secretary 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, CBOE 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. CBOE 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
Background
Registered representative fees (``RR Fees'') as well as other
regulatory fees collected by the Exchange are intended to cover a
portion of the cost of the Exchange's regulatory programs.\3\ The
Exchange has assessed RR Fees since 1990. Each CBOE member firm that
registers a financial advisor (or registered representative),
Registered Options Principal or Financial/Operations Principal is
assessed RR Fees based on the action associated with the registration.
There are annual fees as well as initial, transfer and termination
fees.\4\ Today all options exchanges, regardless of size, charge
similar registered representative fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In addition to RR Fees, CBOE derives revenue associated with
its regulatory programs from Designated Examining Authority
(``DEA'') Fees and Communication Review Fees. These fees are
discussed further below.
\4\ See Section 12(A) of the CBOE Fees Schedule and CBOE Rule
2.22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some member firms have raised concerns that the current self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') regulatory fee structure, in which
every options exchange charges similar fees to their member firms, does
not appear justified. Each RR Fee is a fixed amount of money a member
firm pays to the Exchange for each registered representative within the
firm. The Exchange believes that RR Fees are no longer the most
equitable manner to assess regulatory fees because today there are more
Internet and discount brokerage firms with few registered
representatives that pay little in RR Fees and fewer traditional
brokerage firms with many registered representatives. The regulatory
effort the Exchange expends to review the transactions of each type of
firm is not commensurate with the number of registered representatives
that each firm employs.
In addition, due to the manner in which RR Fees are charged, it is
possible for a member firm to restructure its business to avoid paying
these fees altogether. A firm can avoid RR Fees by terminating its CBOE
membership and sending its business to the Exchange through another
member firm, even an affiliated firm that has many fewer registered
representatives. If member firms terminated their memberships to avoid
RR Fees, the Exchange would suffer the loss of a major source of
funding for its regulatory programs. The Exchange notes that one member
firm has already terminated its membership to avoid RR Fees. The
Exchange believes other firms will do the same unless the Exchange
changes it regulatory fee structure.
Options Regulatory Fee
In order to address the concerns raised by member firms and to
avoid the possibility of losing significant regulatory fee revenue, the
Exchange proposes to eliminate RR Fees and replace them with a
transaction-based ``Options Regulatory Fee'' (``ORF''). The ORF would
be $.0045 per contract and would be assessed by the Exchange to each
member for all options transactions executed by the member that are
cleared by The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') in the customer
range (i.e., that clear in the customer account of the member's
clearing firm at OCC), excluding P/A Orders as defined in the Options
Intermarket Linkage Plan (``Linkage''). The ORF would be imposed upon
all such transactions executed by a member, even if such transactions
do not take place on the Exchange.\5\ The ORF would be collected
[[Page 63745]]
indirectly from members through their clearing firms by OCC on behalf
of the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The ORF would apply to all ``B'', ``C'', and ``W'' account
origin code orders executed by a member on the Exchange. CBOE order
origin codes are defined in CBOE Regulatory Circular RG08-105.
Exchange rules require each member to record the appropriate account
origin code on all orders at the time of entry in order to allow the
Exchange to properly prioritize and route orders and assess
transaction fees pursuant to the rules of the Exchange and report
resulting transactions to the OCC. The Exchange represents that it
has surveillances in place to verify that members mark orders with
the correct account origin code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ORF would become effective on January 1, 2009, at which time RR
Fees would be eliminated. The ORF is designed to recover a portion of
the costs to the Exchange of the supervision and regulation of its
members, including performing routine surveillances, investigations,
examinations, financial monitoring, and policy, rulemaking,
interpretive, and enforcement activities. The Exchange has set the ORF
at a rate that it anticipates will approximately replace the amount of
revenue that would be lost from the elimination of RR Fees.
The ORF would not be charged for member options transactions
because members incur the costs of owning memberships and through their
memberships are charged transaction fees, dues and other fees that are
not applicable to non-members.\6\ The dues and fees paid by members go
into the general funds of the Exchange, a portion of which is used to
help pay the costs of regulation. Thus, the Exchange believes members
are already paying their fair share of the costs of regulation.\7\
Moreover, because the ORF would replace RR Fees, which relate to a
member's customer business, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to
charge the ORF only to transactions that clear as customer at the OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For example, non-broker-dealer customers generally are not
charged transaction fees to trade equity options on the Exchange.
\7\ If the Exchange changes its method of funding regulation or
if circumstances otherwise change in the future, the Exchange may
decide to impose the ORF or a separate regulatory fee on members if
the Exchange deems it advisable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange expects that member firms will pass-through the ORF to
their customers in the same manner that firms pass-through to their
customers the fees charged by SROs to help the SROs meet their
obligation under Section 31 of the Exchange Act.
The Exchange believes that revenue generated from the ORF, when
combined with all of the Exchange's other regulatory fees, will be less
than or equal to the Exchange's regulatory costs. The total amount of
regulatory fees collected by the Exchange is significantly less than
the regulatory costs incurred by the Exchange on an annual basis. In
general, on a year over year basis, regulatory fee revenue (not
including regulatory fine revenue) only covers about 65% of the
Exchange's regulatory costs.
RR Fees make up the largest part of the Exchange's total regulatory
fee revenue. The Exchange collects other regulatory revenues from DEA
Fees,\8\ and Communication Review Fees.\9\ The Exchange notes that its
regulatory responsibilities with respect to member compliance with
options sales practice rules have been allocated to FINRA under a 17d-2
agreement. The ORF is not designed to cover the cost of options sales
practice regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Exchange assesses the DEA Fee to each firm for which the
SEC has designated the Exchange to be the DEA pursuant to SEC Rule
17d-1. The DEA Fee is intended to reimburse the Exchange for its
costs associated with examining member firms and is generally the
same throughout the SRO community. Currently the rate is set at
$0.40 per $1,000.00 of gross revenue for the firm. See Section 12(C)
of the CBOE Fees Schedule.
\9\ Although the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
(``FINRA'') is the SRO that reviews most securities industry
advertisements and other communications, a number of firms still
prefer to have CBOE review their materials. These requests are
charged at $150 per regular occurrence (unless it involves extended
review, such as a book) and $1,000 for an expedited, two-day
turnaround. See Section 12(E) of the CBOE Fees Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange would monitor the amount of revenue collected from the
ORF to ensure that it, in combination with its other regulatory fees
and fines, does not exceed regulatory costs. The Exchange expects to
monitor regulatory costs and revenues at a minimum on an annual basis.
If the Exchange determines regulatory revenues exceed regulatory costs,
the Exchange would adjust the ORF by submitting a fee change filing to
the Commission. The Exchange would notify members of adjustments to the
ORF via regulatory circular.
The Exchange believes the proposed ORF is equitably allocated
because it would be charged to all members on all their customer
options business (as defined above). The Exchange believes the proposed
ORF is reasonable because it will raise revenue related to the amount
of customer options business conducted by members, and thus the amount
of Exchange regulatory services those members will require, instead of
how many registered persons a particular member firm employs.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The Exchange expects that implementation of the proposed
ORF will result generally in many traditional brokerage firms paying
less regulatory fees while Internet and discount brokerage firms
will pay more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes it is reasonable and appropriate for the
Exchange to charge the ORF for options transactions regardless of the
exchange on which the transactions occur. The Exchange has a statutory
obligation to enforce compliance by its members and their associated
persons with the Exchange Act and the rules of the Exchange and to
surveil for other manipulative conduct by market participants
(including non-members) trading on the Exchange. The Exchange cannot
effectively surveil for such conduct without looking at and evaluating
activity across all options markets. Many of the Exchange's market
surveillance programs require the Exchange to look at and evaluate
activity across all options markets, such as surveillance for position
limit violations, manipulation, insider trading, frontrunning, contrary
exercise advice violations and locked/crossed markets in connection
with the Linkage.\11\ Also, CBOE and the other options exchanges are
required to populate a consolidated options audit trail (``COATS'')
system in order to surveil member activities across markets.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The Exchange and other options SROs are parties to a 17d-2
agreement allocating among the SROs regulatory responsibilities
relating to compliance by their common members with rules for
expiring exercise declarations (formerly known as contrary exercise
advices). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56941 (December
11, 2007), 72 FR 71723 (December 18, 2007). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 57649 (April 11, 2008), 73 FR 20976 (April
17, 2008) (approving an amendment which sought to add The Nasdaq
Stock Market, LLC as a participant to such agreement). The Exchange
and other options SROs have recently filed with the Commission an
amendment to this agreement to include the allocation of examination
responsibility with respect to options position limits. The Exchange
retains significant regulatory responsibilities under this
agreement. The Exchange notes within the last year it brought
charges against members in two separate cases relating to member
activity on CBOE as well as on another exchange. One case involved a
contrary exercise advice violation and the other a position limit
violation.
\12\ COATS effectively enhances intermarket options surveillance
by enabling the options exchanges to reconstruct markets promptly,
effectively surveil them and enforce order handling, firm quote,
trade reporting and other rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to its own surveillance programs, the Exchange works
with other SROs and exchanges on intermarket surveillance related
issues.\13\ Through its participation in the Intermarket Surveillance
Group (``ISG'') the Exchange shares information and coordinates
inquiries and investigations with other exchanges designed to address
potential intermarket
[[Page 63746]]
manipulation and trading abuses.\14\ The Exchange's participation in
ISG helps it to satisfy the Exchange Act requirement that it have
coordinated surveillance with markets on which security futures are
traded and markets on which any security underlying security futures
are traded to detect manipulation and insider trading.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Recently the Exchange, at the direction of the SEC, led a
sweep examination of member firms relating to compliance with
Regulation SHO that involved reviewing data with respect to members
of other exchanges and coordinating such reviews with other
exchanges. As a result of this examination, the Exchange has been
assisting FINRA with a Regulation SHO review of a firm for which the
Exchange is not the DEA.
\14\ ISG is an industry organization formed in 1983 to
coordinate intermarket surveillance among the SROs by cooperatively
sharing regulatory information pursuant to a written agreement
between the parties. The goal of the ISG's information sharing is to
coordinate regulatory efforts to address potential intermarket
trading abuses and manipulations.
\15\ See Exchange Act Section 6(h)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that charging the ORF across markets will
avoid having members direct their trades to other markets in order to
avoid the fee and to thereby avoid paying for their fair share of
regulation. If the ORF did not apply to activity across markets, then
members would send their orders to the least cost, least regulated
exchange. Other exchanges would, of course, be free to impose a similar
fee on their member's activity, including the activity of those members
on CBOE.
Finally, there is established precedent for an SRO charging a fee
across markets, namely, FINRA's Trading Activity Fee.\16\ While the
Exchange does not have all of the same regulatory responsibilities as
FINRA, the Exchange believes (as described above) that its broad
regulatory responsibilities with respect to its members' activities,
irrespective of where their transactions take place, supports a
regulatory fee applicable to transactions on other markets. Unlike the
TAF, the ORF would apply only to a member's customer options
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47946 (May 30,
2003), 68 FR 34021 (June 6, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Rule Text Changes: In addition to being set forth in
Section 12 of the CBOE Fees Schedule, DEA Fees and RR Fees are also set
forth in CBOE Rules 2.22(a) and (b), respectively. The Exchange
proposes to delete paragraph (b) from Rule 2.22 to reflect the
elimination of RR Fees. The Exchange proposes to delete paragraph (a)
from Rule 2.22 relating to DEA Fees because the Exchange does not
believe it is necessary for those fees to be set forth in the rule
since they are included on the CBOE Fees Schedule. Also, as a
housekeeping matter, the Exchange proposes to delete Interpretation and
Policy .01 to Rule 2.22 because it relates to charges imposed for
services rendered by Order Book Officials (``OBOs'') and the Exchange
no longer employs OBOs.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\17\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) \18\ of the Act
in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and other persons using its facilities. The Exchange believes
that the ORF is objectively allocated to CBOE members because it would
be charged to all members on all their transactions that clear as
customer at the OCC. Moreover, the Exchange believes the ORF ensures
fairness by assessing higher fees to those member firms that require
more Exchange regulatory services based on the amount of customer
options business they conduct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes the initial level of the fee is reasonable
because it relates to the recovery of the costs of supervising and
regulating members and it is expected to equal the Exchange's revenue
from RR Fees for 2007. The Exchange notes that the Commission has
addressed the funding of an SRO's regulatory operations in the Concept
Release Concerning Self-Regulation \19\ and the release on the Fair
Administration and Governance of Self-Regulatory Organizations.\20\ In
the Concept Release, the Commission states that: ``Given the inherent
tension between an SRO's role as a business and as a regulator, there
undoubtedly is a temptation for an SRO to fund the business side of its
operations at the expense of regulation.'' \21\ In order to address
this potential conflict, the Commission proposed in the Governance
Release rules that would require an SRO to direct monies collected from
regulatory fees, fines, or penalties exclusively to fund the regulatory
operations and other programs of the SRO related to its regulatory
responsibilities.\22\ The Exchange has designed the ORF to generate
revenues that, when combined with all of the Exchange's other
regulatory fees, will be less than or equal to the Exchange's
regulatory costs, which is consistent with the Commission's view that
regulatory fees be used for regulatory purposes and not to support the
Exchange's business side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50700 (November 18,
2004), 69 FR 71256 (December 8, 2004) (``Concept Release'').
\20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50699 (November 18,
2004), 69 FR 71126 (December 8, 2004) (``Governance Release'').
\21\ Concept Release at 71268.
\22\ Governance Release at 71142.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
CBOE 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 solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \23\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \24\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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-CBOE-2008-105 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2008-105. 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
[[Page 63747]]
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 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. 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 publicly available. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-CBOE-2008-105 and should be submitted on or before
November 17, 2008.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-25502 Filed 10-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P