Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule Relating to Pricing Applicable to Electronic Transactions in Non-Penny Pilot Issues, 68163-68167 [2012-27712]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 221 / Thursday, November 15, 2012 / Notices
summary of the subject matter to be
presented.
Oral presentations may not exceed ten
(10) minutes. The time for individual
presentations may be reduced
proportionately, if necessary, to afford
all participants who have submitted a
timely request an opportunity to be
heard.
Participants wishing to submit a
written statement for the record must
submit a copy of such statement to
OPIC’s Corporate Secretary no later than
5 p.m. Wednesday, November 21, 2012.
Such statement must be typewritten,
double-spaced, and may not exceed
twenty-five (25) pages.
Upon receipt of the required notice,
OPIC will prepare an agenda, which
will be available at the hearing, that
identifies speakers, the subject on which
each participant will speak, and the
time allotted for each presentation.
A written summary of the hearing will
be compiled, and such summary will be
made available, upon written request to
OPIC’s Corporate Secretary, at the cost
of reproduction.
Written summaries of the projects to
be presented at the December 6, 2012
Board meeting will be posted on OPIC’s
Web site on or about Friday, November
16, 2012.
CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION:
Information on the hearing may be
obtained from Connie M. Downs at (202)
336–8438, via facsimile at (202) 408–
0297, or via email at
Connie.Downs@opic.gov.
Dated: November 9, 2012.
Connie M. Downs,
OPIC Corporate Secretary.
The
General Counsel of the United States
Postal Service has certified that the
meeting was properly closed under the
Government in the Sunshine Act.
GENERAL COUNSEL CERTIFICATION:
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Requests for information about the
meeting should be addressed to the
Secretary of the Board, Julie S. Moore,
at (202) 268–4800.
Julie S. Moore,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–27840 Filed 11–13–12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meeting
FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS
ANNOUNCEMENT: [77 FR 67408,
November 9, 2012]
Closed Meeting.
PLACE: 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC.
STATUS:
DATE AND TIME OF PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED
MEETING: Friday, November 9, 2012.
Cancellation of
Meeting.
The Closed Meeting scheduled for
Friday, November 9, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.
has been cancelled.
For further information please contact
the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551–
5400.
CHANGE IN THE MEETING:
Dated: November 9, 2012.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–27867 Filed 11–13–12; 11:15 am]
[FR Doc. 2012–27853 Filed 11–13–12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
BILLING CODE 3210–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Board of Governors; Sunshine Act
Meeting
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
POSTAL SERVICE
[Release No. 34–68179; File No. SR–
NYSEARCA–2012–121]
Board Votes To Close November 1,
2012, Meeting
By telephone vote on November 1,
2012, members of the Board of
Governors of the United States Postal
Service met and voted unanimously to
close to public observation its meeting
held in Washington, DC, via
teleconference. The Board determined
that no earlier public notice was
possible.
MATTERS CONSIDERED:
1. Strategic Issues
2. Financial Matters.
3. Pricing.
4. Personnel Matters and
Compensation Issues.
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Arca
Options Fee Schedule Relating to
Pricing Applicable to Electronic
Transactions in Non-Penny Pilot
Issues
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Nov 14, 2012
Jkt 229001
November 8, 2012.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3
notice is hereby given that, on October
1 15
U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
2 15
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68163
25, 2012, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE Arca’’) filed with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items
have been prepared by the selfregulatory organization. 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 the
NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule (‘‘Fee
Schedule’’) to restructure the pricing
applicable to electronic transactions in
non-Penny Pilot issues. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange’s Web site at www.nyse.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
self-regulatory organization 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 those 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to restructure
the pricing applicable to electronic
transactions in non-Penny Pilot issues.4
The Exchange proposes to make the fee
change operative on November 1, 2012.
Currently, all transactions in nonPenny Pilot issues are considered
‘‘standard executions,’’ as opposed to
the ‘‘Post-Take’’ pricing structure that
4 As provided under NYSE Arca Options Rule
6.72, options on certain issues have been approved
to trade with a minimum price variation of $0.01
as part of a pilot program that is currently
scheduled to expire on December 31, 2012. The
proposed change will not have an impact on pricing
applicable to manual transactions in non-Penny
Pilot issues, except that, as proposed, Marketing
Charges would no longer apply. However, the
Exchange does propose to amend the Fee Schedule
to reflect that Firm, Broker Dealer and Customer
electronic executions would become ‘‘N/A’’ with
respect to standard executions.
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
15NON1
68164
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 221 / Thursday, November 15, 2012 / Notices
currently applies only to electronic
executions in Penny Pilot issues.5 The
Exchange now proposes to apply the
Post-Take pricing structure to electronic
executions in non-Penny Pilot issues.
As a result, electronic transactions in
non-Penny Pilot issues would be subject
to Post-Take credits and fees, as is
currently applicable for Penny Pilot
issues. Under this structure, an
electronic order or quote is charged a fee
upon execution if it executes against a
resting order or quote in the
Consolidated Book (i.e., taking
liquidity), or, alternatively, a resting
electronic order or quote in the
Consolidated Book (i.e., posted
liquidity) generally receives a liquidity
credit when an incoming order or quote
executes against it.6
To remain competitive, the Exchange
is adopting Post-Take pricing for
electronic transactions in all non-Penny
Pilot issues, but the rates would be
different than those that currently apply
to Penny Pilot issues. To encourage
greater Customer participation, the
proposed new rates would provide a
higher rebate to Customers that post
liquidity, as compared to other market
participants, and a rate for Customer
orders that take liquidity that is
comparable to other market participants.
The proposed rates for Lead Market
Makers (‘‘LMMs’’) and Market Makers
for taking liquidity would be similar to
each other, although not identical
because of differing levels of
obligations. The proposed rates also
provide for higher rebates for posting
liquidity for Market Makers, in order to
offset the higher fees for taking
liquidity. Firm and Broker Dealer
electronic orders that are posted in the
Consolidated Book will continue to be
charged an execution fee, which would
be the same as the current fee, despite
such transactions posting liquidity.
The proposed new fees would be as
follows:
Electronic executions in
non-Penny Pilot issues
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Post
liquidity
Customer Electronic .................
LMM ......................
NYSE Arca Market
Maker ................
Firm and Broker
Dealer Electronic
Take
liquidity
¥$0.75
¥0.40
$0.79
0.78
¥0.30
0.80
0.50
0.85
5 Manual transactions in Penny Pilot issues are
considered standard executions and billed as such.
6 As described below, a Firm or Broker Dealer
electronic transaction in a non-Penny Pilot issue
would be charged a fee, even if it is posting
liquidity.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Nov 14, 2012
Jkt 229001
As with the Penny Pilot issues, there
would be no charges for executions in
non-Penny Pilot issues on the opening
auction. Also, orders originating from
the Trading Floor that execute against
the Consolidated Book so as to complete
a manual transaction would continue to
be charged manual order fees, as is
currently the case for Penny Pilot issues,
for which standard execution fees
apply.7
In addition, the Exchange proposes to
eliminate Marketing Charges on the
Exchange.8 Marketing Charges do not
currently apply to transactions in Penny
Pilot issues and, related to the proposal
to apply Post-Take pricing to non-Penny
Pilot issues, the Exchange has decided
to eliminate Marketing Charges entirely.
The Exchange also proposes
conforming changes to the endnotes in
the Fee Schedule to account for the
application of Post-Take pricing for nonPenny Pilot issues. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to amend endnote 5
to specify that only manual executions
would be considered ‘‘standard
executions’’ (i.e., they would not be
subject to Post-Take pricing). The
Exchange also proposes to amend
endnote 6 to specify that, as is currently
the case for Penny Pilot issues,
transaction fees do not apply to
executions occurring during the
Opening Auction, as described above.
The Exchange also proposes to amend
endnote 6 to address the proposal that
Firms and Broker Dealers be charged a
fee for posting liquidity in non-Penny
Pilot issues.
The Exchange notes that the proposed
fees are similar to those recently
adopted by the NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC (‘‘NASDAQ’’) for transactions on
the NASDAQ Options Market (‘‘NOM’’)
in non-Penny Pilot Options.9
Additionally, the proposed fees and
credits for non-Penny Pilot issues are
similar to fees and rebates currently in
place at BATS Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BATS’’)
Options (‘‘BATS Options’’).10
7 See
endnote 5 in the Fee Schedule.
Marketing Charge of $0.65 currently applies
to LMM and Market Maker transactions against
Customers.
9 See Exchange Act Release No. 68029 (October
10, 2012), 77 FR 63384 (October 16, 2012) (SR–
NASDAQ–2012–114).
10 BATS assesses a Non-Penny Pilot Option Fee
of $0.80 [sic] per contract for accessing liquidity for
a Professional, Firm or Market Maker order that
removes liquidity from the BATS Options order
book and a $0.75 per contract rebate for a Customer
order that removes liquidity from the BATS Options
order book. Additionally, BATS pays a $0.70 per
contract rebate for a Professional, Firm or Market
Maker order that adds liquidity to the BATS
Options order book and a $0.75 rebate per contract
for a Customer order that adds liquidity to the
BATS Options order book.
8A
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Exchange notes that the proposed
changes are not otherwise intended to
address any other issues surrounding
fees for non-Penny Pilot issues and the
Exchange is not aware of any problems
that OTP Holders and OTP Firms would
have in complying with the proposed
change.
The Exchange proposes to make the
fee change operative on November 1,
2012.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’),11 in general,
and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,12 in particular,
because it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members,
issuers and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly
discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market, comprised of 10
U.S. options exchanges, in which
sophisticated and knowledgeable
market participants can and do send
order flow to competing exchanges if
they deem fee levels at a particular
exchange to be excessive or the rebate
offered to be inadequate. The Exchange
believes that the proposed fee and
rebate structure is competitive and
similar to other fees and rebates in place
on other exchanges.13 The Exchange
believes that this competitive
marketplace materially impacts the fees
and rebates present on the Exchange
today and substantially influences the
proposal set forth herein. The Exchange
believes that it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to apply the
proposed non-Penny Pilot issue pricing
to the various market participants, as
noted in this proposal. In this regard, all
market participants transacting in nonPenny Pilot issues would be subject to
the fees and rebates proposed herein.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed Customer credit to post
liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues is
reasonable because it would continue to
incent OTP Holders and OTP Firms to
transact Customer order flow on the
Exchange. In this regard, Customer
order flow benefits all market
participants through the increased
liquidity that it brings to the market.
Customers would be subject to a $0.79
per contract fee to remove liquidity in
non-Penny Pilot issues, as compared to
11 15
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
13 See supra notes 9 and 10.
12 15
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
15NON1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 221 / Thursday, November 15, 2012 / Notices
no fee today, which the Exchange
believes is reasonable due to the
opportunity to receive the proposed
credit. The Exchange believes that its
proposal to offer a Customer credit to
post liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues
(from no credit today, to $0.75 per
contract as proposed) is reasonable
because other market participants will
benefit from the increased order flow to
the Exchange.
The Exchange believes that charging a
fee for Firm and Broker Dealer
executions that post liquidity and
increasing the fee for their executions
that take liquidity in non-Penny Pilot
issues is reasonable because the fees
would enable the Exchange to
incentivize Customers to post greater
amounts of liquidity in non-Penny Pilot
issues. The Exchange believes that its
success at attracting Customer order
flow benefits all market participants by
improving the quality of order
interaction and executions at the
Exchange, including for Firms and
Broker Dealers.
The Exchange believes that it is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess Firms and
Broker Dealers a fee for posting liquidity
in non-Penny Pilot issues, but to
provide a credit to other market
participants for posting liquidity in nonPenny Pilot issues. The Exchange notes
that Firms and Broker Dealers would be
assessed the same $0.50 per contract fee
that they are currently assessed for
posting liquidity in non-Penny Pilot
issues. More specifically, the Exchange
believes that not assessing a Customer,
LMM or NYSE Arca Market Maker a fee
for posting liquidity in non-Penny Pilot
issues, as compared to Firms and Broker
Dealers, is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because Customers,
LMMs, and NYSE Arca Market Makers
differ from Firms and Broker Dealers. In
this regard, the Exchange believes that
Customer order flow benefits all market
participants by improving liquidity and
the quality of order interaction.
Additionally, LMMs and Market Makers
have obligations to the market and
regulatory requirements,14 which
normally do not apply to other market
participants. For example, an LMM has
the obligation to make continuous
markets 90% of the time that the
Exchange is open for trading, while
other Market Makers have the obligation
to make continuous markets 60% of the
time that the Exchange is open for
trading. Both LMMs and other Market
14 See NYSE Arca Rules 6.32 (Market Maker
Defined), 6.37 (Obligations of Market Makers),
6.37A (Obligations of Market Makers—OX) and
6.37B (Market Maker Quotations—OX).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Nov 14, 2012
Jkt 229001
Makers must also engage in a course of
dealing that is consistent with the
maintenance of a fair and orderly
market. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to charge Firms
and Broker Dealers for posting liquidity
but to not charge other market
participants for doing so.
The proposed differentiation between
pricing for Customers, LMMs, NYSE
Arca Market Makers and other market
participants is also equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it
reflects the differing contributions made
to the liquidity and trading environment
on the Exchange by Customers, LMMs,
and NYSE Arca Market Makers, as well
as the differing mix of orders entered.
The Exchange believes that increasing
the Firm and Broker Dealer fees for
taking liquidity in non-Penny Pilot
issues to $0.85 per contract is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because
Firms and Broker Dealers will be
assessed the same fee. Further, the
amount of the fee is reasonable because
it is the same as the rate charged to
Firms and Broker Dealers on other
exchanges. For example, NOM charges
Professionals, Non-NOM Market Makers
and Firms $0.85 per contract to take
liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues.
Customers, LMMs and Market Makers
would be assessed a lower fee for taking
liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues, as
compared to Firms and Broker Dealers,
because, as mentioned above, the fees
reflect the differing contributions made
to the liquidity and trading environment
on the Exchange by Customers, LMMs,
and Market Makers, as well as the
differing mix of orders.
The Exchange believes that the rates
proposed for LMMs and Market Makers
are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory. In this regard, nonPenny Pilot issues are typically less
liquid than Penny Pilot issues and thus
the heightened quoting obligation of the
LMM in these issues requires a
differentiated posting incentive as
compared to Penny Pilot issues.
Accordingly, since there is much greater
risk for a liquidity provider when
posting versus taking in less liquid
names and the LMM’s quoting
obligation is 50% higher than a regular
Market Maker, they require a
meaningfully higher posting rebate.
Taking liquidity is not as much of the
core function of the liquidity provider,
thus the difference in take rates do not
have to be as substantial, which the
Exchange believes is reasonable.
The Exchange also believes that,
overall, the proposed fees for taking
liquidity are reasonable because in the
current U.S. options market, many of
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68165
the contracts are quoted in pennies.
Under this pricing structure, the
minimum penny tick increment equates
to a $1.00 economic value difference per
contract, given that a single
standardized U.S. option contract covers
100 shares of the underlying stock.
For contracts that are quoted in $0.05
increments (non-pennies), the value per
tick is $5.00 in proceeds to the investor
transacting in these contracts. Liquidity
rebate and access fee structures on the
make-take exchanges, including the
Exchange’s Post-Take pricing structure,
for securities quoted in penny
increments are commonly in the $0.30
to $0.45 per contract range. A $0.30 per
contract rebate in a penny quoted
security is a rebate equivalent to 30% of
the value of the minimum tick. A $0.45
per contract fee in a penny quoted
security is a charge equivalent to 45%
of the value of that minimum tick. In
other words, in penny quoted securities,
where the price is improved by one tick
with an access fee of $0.45 per contract,
an investor paying to access that quote
is still $0.55 better off than trading at
the wider spread, even without the
access fee ($1.00 of price improvement
less a $0.45 access fee equals $0.55
better economics). This computation is
equally true for securities quoted in
wider increments. Rebates and access
fees near the $0.85 per contract level
equate to only 17% of the value of the
minimum tick in non-Penny Pilot
issues, less than the experience today in
Penny Pilot issues. For example, a retail
investor transacting a single contract in
a non-penny quoted security quoted a
single tick tighter than the rest of the
market, and paying an access fee of
$0.79 per contract, is receiving an
economic benefit of $4.21 ($0.05
improved tick equals $5.00 in proceeds
less $0.79 access fee, which equals
$4.21). The Exchange believes that
encouraging LMMs and Market Makers
to quote more aggressively by giving
credits to post liquidity and incenting
Customer orders to post on NYSE Arca
will narrow the spread in non-Penny
Pilot issues to the benefit of investors
and all market participants by
improving the overall economics of the
resulting transactions that occur on the
Exchange, even if the access fee paid in
connection with such transactions is
higher. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the proposed fees and
rebates for the non-Penny Pilot issues
are reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory.
As with Penny Pilot issues, there will
be no fees for transactions on the
Opening Auction. The Exchange
believes that this is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
15NON1
68166
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 221 / Thursday, November 15, 2012 / Notices
would apply to trading interest from all
market participants, and is reasonable
because a determination of posting
liquidity or taking liquidity is difficult
prior to the establishment of the
opening market.
The Exchange believes the application
of manual fees to orders represented by
a Floor Broker and partially executed
against the Consolidated Book are
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory, because the fees are
those expected by the market
participant that submits the order, and
does not alter the fees or credits
expected by the market participant
whose order or quote is resting in the
Consolidated Book.
The Exchange believes that
eliminating Marketing Charges on the
Exchange is reasonable because it would
eliminate a fee for Market Makers and
LMMs that the Exchange has decided to
no longer apply in light of the proposed
application of Post-Take pricing to nonPenny Pilot issues—currently,
Marketing Charges do not apply to
Penny Pilot issues. This is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory because the
charges are currently collected only
from LMMs and Market Makers who
interact with Customer orders, and, as a
result of the proposed change, would no
longer be collected from any participant
on the Exchange. As a result, Customers
would receive direct credit for posted
liquidity, rather than a payment for
order flow in an indirect manner.
Finally, the Exchange notes that it
operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can
readily favor competing venues. In such
an environment, the Exchange must
continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and credits to remain
competitive with other exchanges. For
the reasons described above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change reflects this competitive
environment.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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
The Exchange received one
unsolicited, written comment on the
proposed rule change from an LMM on
the Exchange. The LMM commented
that the proposed pricing structure
would negatively impact its business
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Nov 14, 2012
Jkt 229001
because it trades less liquid issues with
wider markets, and that the
restructuring of the fees will not provide
a sufficient incentive to him to provide
tighter markets to receive credits for
posting liquidity. The LMM also stated
that the proposed pricing structure will
encourage order flow providers to send
mid-market trades (orders between the
bid and offer) to the Exchange to collect
payment (posted liquidity credits) and
gain priority, and then direct markettaking orders to other exchanges where
the order flow provider would not be
charged a market taker fee.
Additionally, the LMM believed that
the proposed pricing structure would
encourage competition from Customers
who would have an incentive to
improve on the LMM’s markets to
collect posted liquidity credits and also
gain priority, diminishing the value of
being an OTP-holding market maker on
the Exchange. Lastly, the LMM
commented that there might or might
not be an increase in order flow between
the bid and offer, but that other, more
sophisticated firms would be more
competitive, and, therefore, the LMM
would not see the benefits of the
proposed pricing structure.
In response to the LMM’s statements,
the Exchange believes, as described
above, that the proposed fee and rebate
structure is competitive and similar to
other fees and rebates in place on other
exchanges. The LMM’s complaints are
that he will not be able to compete
against Customers or more sophisticated
firms. The Exchange believes that
attracting Customer order flow benefits
all market participants by improving the
quality of order interaction and
executions at the Exchange, including
for Firms and Broker Dealers.
Encouraging LMMs and Market Makers
to quote more aggressively by giving
credits to post liquidity and incenting
Customer orders to post on NYSE Arca
will narrow the spread in non-Penny
Pilot issues to the benefit of investors
and all market participants by
improving the overall economics of the
resulting transactions that occur on the
Exchange, and by increasing
competition between the LMM and
Customers and competing Market
Makers, spreads will narrow and more
attractive order flow will be available on
the Exchange, enhancing the markets for
all participants.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change is effective
upon filing pursuant to Section
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19(b)(3)(A) 15 of the Act and
subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 16
thereunder, because it establishes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by the
NYSE Arca.
At any time within 60 days of the
filing of such proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend 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 email to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–NYSEARCA–2012–121 on
the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NYSEARCA–2012–121.
This file number should be included on
the subject line if email 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
15 15
16 17
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
15NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 221 / Thursday, November 15, 2012 / Notices
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the NYSE’s
principal office and on its Internet Web
site at www.nyse.com. 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–
NYSEARCA–2012–121, and should be
submitted on or before December 6,
2012.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.17
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–27712 Filed 11–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–68182; File No. SR–CHX–
2012–16]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Single-Sided Orders Fees and Rebates
November 8, 2012
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD 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 November
2, 2012, the Chicago Stock Exchange,
Inc. (‘‘CHX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange.
CHX has filed the proposal pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule
19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,4 which renders
the proposal 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 the Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The CHX proposes to amend its
Schedule of Fees and Assessments (the
‘‘Fee Schedule’’), effective November 2,
2012, to create a separate fee and rebate
structure for each derivative and non17 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
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)(2).
1 15
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Nov 14, 2012
Jkt 229001
derivative Tape A, B and C security,
with respect to single-sided order
executions of 100 or more shares. The
text of this proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange’s Web site at
https://www.chx.com/rules/
proposed_rules.htm and in the
Commission’s Public Reference Room,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549.
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
CHX included statements concerning
the purpose of and basis for the
proposed rule changes and discussed
any comments it received regarding the
proposal. The text of these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. The CHX 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
Through this filing, the Exchange
proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees
and Assessments (the ‘‘Fee Schedule’’),
effective November 2, 2012, to amend
Section E.1 of the Fee Schedule, which
concerns single-sided order executions
of 100 or more shares, to establish fees
and rebates specific to each derivative
and non-derivative Tape A, B and C
security type.
Current Section E.1
On January 9, 2012, the Exchange
adopted the current Fee Schedule that
incorporated, inter alia, a separate fee
and rebate structure for Derivative
Securities Products (‘‘DSPs’’) 5 and
removed references to Tape A, B and C
securities throughout its Fee Schedule.6
Specifically, with respect to Section E.1,
the Exchange eliminated the distinction
in the fee and rebate structure for Tape
A, B and C securities 7 and replaced it
5 Per Section E.1 of the current Fee Schedule,
‘‘Derivative Securities Product’’ is defined as any
type of option, warrant, hybrid securities product
or any other security, other than a single equity
option or a security futures product, whose value
is based, in whole or in part, upon the performance
of, or interest in, an underlying instrument. This
definition is drawn from Rule 19b–4(e). See 17 CFR
240.19b–4(e).
6 See Exchange Act. Release No. 66139 (January
11, 2012), 77 F.R. 2583 (January 18, 2012) (SR–
CHX–2012–01).
7 Tape A securities are those securities for which
the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. is the primary
listing market. Tape C securities are those securities
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68167
with a structure based on DSPs and nonDSPs.
With respect to the current fees and
rebates of Section E.1, for transactions
in DSPs priced greater than or equal to
$1.00/share that are executed in the
Regular Trading Session, the current Fee
Schedule charges a fee of $0.003/share
for removing liquidity and gives a rebate
of $0.0022/share for providing liquidity.
For transactions in non-DSPs priced
equal to or greater than $1.00/share that
are executed in the Regular Trading
Session, the current Fee Schedule
charges a fee of $0.003/share for
removing liquidity, but gives no rebate
for providing liquidity. For transactions
in all securities priced equal to or less
than $1.00/share that are executed in
the Early and Late Trading Sessions, the
current Fee Schedule charges a fee of
$0.003/share for removing liquidity and
gives a rebate of $0.0022/share for
providing liquidity. For transactions in
all securities priced less than $1.00/
share, the current Fee Schedule charges
a fee of 0.30% of trade value for
removing liquidity and gives a rebate of
$0.00009/share for providing liquidity.
Proposed Section E.1
The Exchange now proposes to amend
Section E.1 to reincorporate references
to Tape A, B and C securities, while
maintaining the distinction between
DSPs and non-DSPs, so as to establish
fees and rebates specific to each
derivative and non-derivative Tape A, B
and C security type and to maintain the
current rebate and fee values, but for
two exceptions. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to distinguish
between ‘‘Regular’’ and ‘‘Early and
Late’’ trading sessions. Each trading
session will be further divided into six
categories, one for each derivative and
non-derivative Tape A, B and C
security. Finally, each one of the six
security-types will be then divided into
securities priced greater than or equal to
$1.00/share or priced less than $1.00/
share. At this point, each security-type
will be assigned a specific fee and rebate
value, resulting in a total of twenty-four
(24) distinct sets of fees and rebates.
With respect to the actual values of
the fees and rebates of proposed Section
E.1, the Exchange proposes to mostly
adopt the fee and rebate values
currently in Section E.1. Specifically,
for transactions in Tape A and B NonDSP securities priced greater than or
equal to $1.00/share executed during
the Regular Trading Session, the
for which the NASDAQ Stock Exchange, Inc. is the
primary listing center. Tape B securities are those
securities for which some other national securities
exchange is the primary listing market.
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
15NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 221 (Thursday, November 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68163-68167]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27712]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-68179; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2012-121]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule Relating to Pricing Applicable to Electronic
Transactions in Non-Penny Pilot Issues
November 8, 2012.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on October 25, 2012, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
\3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule'') to restructure the pricing applicable to electronic
transactions in non-Penny Pilot issues. The text of the proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to restructure the pricing applicable to
electronic transactions in non-Penny Pilot issues.\4\ The Exchange
proposes to make the fee change operative on November 1, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As provided under NYSE Arca Options Rule 6.72, options on
certain issues have been approved to trade with a minimum price
variation of $0.01 as part of a pilot program that is currently
scheduled to expire on December 31, 2012. The proposed change will
not have an impact on pricing applicable to manual transactions in
non-Penny Pilot issues, except that, as proposed, Marketing Charges
would no longer apply. However, the Exchange does propose to amend
the Fee Schedule to reflect that Firm, Broker Dealer and Customer
electronic executions would become ``N/A'' with respect to standard
executions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, all transactions in non-Penny Pilot issues are
considered ``standard executions,'' as opposed to the ``Post-Take''
pricing structure that
[[Page 68164]]
currently applies only to electronic executions in Penny Pilot
issues.\5\ The Exchange now proposes to apply the Post-Take pricing
structure to electronic executions in non-Penny Pilot issues. As a
result, electronic transactions in non-Penny Pilot issues would be
subject to Post-Take credits and fees, as is currently applicable for
Penny Pilot issues. Under this structure, an electronic order or quote
is charged a fee upon execution if it executes against a resting order
or quote in the Consolidated Book (i.e., taking liquidity), or,
alternatively, a resting electronic order or quote in the Consolidated
Book (i.e., posted liquidity) generally receives a liquidity credit
when an incoming order or quote executes against it.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Manual transactions in Penny Pilot issues are considered
standard executions and billed as such.
\6\ As described below, a Firm or Broker Dealer electronic
transaction in a non-Penny Pilot issue would be charged a fee, even
if it is posting liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remain competitive, the Exchange is adopting Post-Take pricing
for electronic transactions in all non-Penny Pilot issues, but the
rates would be different than those that currently apply to Penny Pilot
issues. To encourage greater Customer participation, the proposed new
rates would provide a higher rebate to Customers that post liquidity,
as compared to other market participants, and a rate for Customer
orders that take liquidity that is comparable to other market
participants. The proposed rates for Lead Market Makers (``LMMs'') and
Market Makers for taking liquidity would be similar to each other,
although not identical because of differing levels of obligations. The
proposed rates also provide for higher rebates for posting liquidity
for Market Makers, in order to offset the higher fees for taking
liquidity. Firm and Broker Dealer electronic orders that are posted in
the Consolidated Book will continue to be charged an execution fee,
which would be the same as the current fee, despite such transactions
posting liquidity.
The proposed new fees would be as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electronic executions
in non-Penny Pilot
issues
-----------------------
Post Take
liquidity liquidity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Electronic............................. -$0.75 $0.79
LMM............................................. -0.40 0.78
NYSE Arca Market Maker.......................... -0.30 0.80
Firm and Broker Dealer Electronic............... 0.50 0.85
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As with the Penny Pilot issues, there would be no charges for
executions in non-Penny Pilot issues on the opening auction. Also,
orders originating from the Trading Floor that execute against the
Consolidated Book so as to complete a manual transaction would continue
to be charged manual order fees, as is currently the case for Penny
Pilot issues, for which standard execution fees apply.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See endnote 5 in the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Exchange proposes to eliminate Marketing Charges
on the Exchange.\8\ Marketing Charges do not currently apply to
transactions in Penny Pilot issues and, related to the proposal to
apply Post-Take pricing to non-Penny Pilot issues, the Exchange has
decided to eliminate Marketing Charges entirely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ A Marketing Charge of $0.65 currently applies to LMM and
Market Maker transactions against Customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes conforming changes to the endnotes in
the Fee Schedule to account for the application of Post-Take pricing
for non-Penny Pilot issues. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
amend endnote 5 to specify that only manual executions would be
considered ``standard executions'' (i.e., they would not be subject to
Post-Take pricing). The Exchange also proposes to amend endnote 6 to
specify that, as is currently the case for Penny Pilot issues,
transaction fees do not apply to executions occurring during the
Opening Auction, as described above. The Exchange also proposes to
amend endnote 6 to address the proposal that Firms and Broker Dealers
be charged a fee for posting liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues.
The Exchange notes that the proposed fees are similar to those
recently adopted by the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') for
transactions on the NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'') in non-Penny Pilot
Options.\9\ Additionally, the proposed fees and credits for non-Penny
Pilot issues are similar to fees and rebates currently in place at BATS
Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'') Options (``BATS Options'').\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Exchange Act Release No. 68029 (October 10, 2012), 77 FR
63384 (October 16, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-114).
\10\ BATS assesses a Non-Penny Pilot Option Fee of $0.80 [sic]
per contract for accessing liquidity for a Professional, Firm or
Market Maker order that removes liquidity from the BATS Options
order book and a $0.75 per contract rebate for a Customer order that
removes liquidity from the BATS Options order book. Additionally,
BATS pays a $0.70 per contract rebate for a Professional, Firm or
Market Maker order that adds liquidity to the BATS Options order
book and a $0.75 rebate per contract for a Customer order that adds
liquidity to the BATS Options order book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange notes that the proposed changes are not otherwise
intended to address any other issues surrounding fees for non-Penny
Pilot issues and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that OTP
Holders and OTP Firms would have in complying with the proposed change.
The Exchange proposes to make the fee change operative on November
1, 2012.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\12\ in particular, because it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does
not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market, comprised of
10 U.S. options exchanges, in which sophisticated and knowledgeable
market participants can and do send order flow to competing exchanges
if they deem fee levels at a particular exchange to be excessive or the
rebate offered to be inadequate. The Exchange believes that the
proposed fee and rebate structure is competitive and similar to other
fees and rebates in place on other exchanges.\13\ The Exchange believes
that this competitive marketplace materially impacts the fees and
rebates present on the Exchange today and substantially influences the
proposal set forth herein. The Exchange believes that it is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory to apply the proposed non-Penny Pilot
issue pricing to the various market participants, as noted in this
proposal. In this regard, all market participants transacting in non-
Penny Pilot issues would be subject to the fees and rebates proposed
herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See supra notes 9 and 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed Customer credit to post
liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues is reasonable because it would
continue to incent OTP Holders and OTP Firms to transact Customer order
flow on the Exchange. In this regard, Customer order flow benefits all
market participants through the increased liquidity that it brings to
the market. Customers would be subject to a $0.79 per contract fee to
remove liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues, as compared to
[[Page 68165]]
no fee today, which the Exchange believes is reasonable due to the
opportunity to receive the proposed credit. The Exchange believes that
its proposal to offer a Customer credit to post liquidity in non-Penny
Pilot issues (from no credit today, to $0.75 per contract as proposed)
is reasonable because other market participants will benefit from the
increased order flow to the Exchange.
The Exchange believes that charging a fee for Firm and Broker
Dealer executions that post liquidity and increasing the fee for their
executions that take liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues is reasonable
because the fees would enable the Exchange to incentivize Customers to
post greater amounts of liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues. The
Exchange believes that its success at attracting Customer order flow
benefits all market participants by improving the quality of order
interaction and executions at the Exchange, including for Firms and
Broker Dealers.
The Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess Firms and Broker Dealers a fee for posting
liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues, but to provide a credit to other
market participants for posting liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues.
The Exchange notes that Firms and Broker Dealers would be assessed the
same $0.50 per contract fee that they are currently assessed for
posting liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues. More specifically, the
Exchange believes that not assessing a Customer, LMM or NYSE Arca
Market Maker a fee for posting liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues, as
compared to Firms and Broker Dealers, is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because Customers, LMMs, and NYSE Arca Market Makers
differ from Firms and Broker Dealers. In this regard, the Exchange
believes that Customer order flow benefits all market participants by
improving liquidity and the quality of order interaction. Additionally,
LMMs and Market Makers have obligations to the market and regulatory
requirements,\14\ which normally do not apply to other market
participants. For example, an LMM has the obligation to make continuous
markets 90% of the time that the Exchange is open for trading, while
other Market Makers have the obligation to make continuous markets 60%
of the time that the Exchange is open for trading. Both LMMs and other
Market Makers must also engage in a course of dealing that is
consistent with the maintenance of a fair and orderly market.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to charge Firms and Broker Dealers for posting
liquidity but to not charge other market participants for doing so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See NYSE Arca Rules 6.32 (Market Maker Defined), 6.37
(Obligations of Market Makers), 6.37A (Obligations of Market
Makers--OX) and 6.37B (Market Maker Quotations--OX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed differentiation between pricing for Customers, LMMs,
NYSE Arca Market Makers and other market participants is also equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because it reflects the differing
contributions made to the liquidity and trading environment on the
Exchange by Customers, LMMs, and NYSE Arca Market Makers, as well as
the differing mix of orders entered. The Exchange believes that
increasing the Firm and Broker Dealer fees for taking liquidity in non-
Penny Pilot issues to $0.85 per contract is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because Firms and Broker Dealers will be assessed the
same fee. Further, the amount of the fee is reasonable because it is
the same as the rate charged to Firms and Broker Dealers on other
exchanges. For example, NOM charges Professionals, Non-NOM Market
Makers and Firms $0.85 per contract to take liquidity in non-Penny
Pilot issues. Customers, LMMs and Market Makers would be assessed a
lower fee for taking liquidity in non-Penny Pilot issues, as compared
to Firms and Broker Dealers, because, as mentioned above, the fees
reflect the differing contributions made to the liquidity and trading
environment on the Exchange by Customers, LMMs, and Market Makers, as
well as the differing mix of orders.
The Exchange believes that the rates proposed for LMMs and Market
Makers are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. In this regard,
non-Penny Pilot issues are typically less liquid than Penny Pilot
issues and thus the heightened quoting obligation of the LMM in these
issues requires a differentiated posting incentive as compared to Penny
Pilot issues. Accordingly, since there is much greater risk for a
liquidity provider when posting versus taking in less liquid names and
the LMM's quoting obligation is 50% higher than a regular Market Maker,
they require a meaningfully higher posting rebate. Taking liquidity is
not as much of the core function of the liquidity provider, thus the
difference in take rates do not have to be as substantial, which the
Exchange believes is reasonable.
The Exchange also believes that, overall, the proposed fees for
taking liquidity are reasonable because in the current U.S. options
market, many of the contracts are quoted in pennies. Under this pricing
structure, the minimum penny tick increment equates to a $1.00 economic
value difference per contract, given that a single standardized U.S.
option contract covers 100 shares of the underlying stock.
For contracts that are quoted in $0.05 increments (non-pennies),
the value per tick is $5.00 in proceeds to the investor transacting in
these contracts. Liquidity rebate and access fee structures on the
make-take exchanges, including the Exchange's Post-Take pricing
structure, for securities quoted in penny increments are commonly in
the $0.30 to $0.45 per contract range. A $0.30 per contract rebate in a
penny quoted security is a rebate equivalent to 30% of the value of the
minimum tick. A $0.45 per contract fee in a penny quoted security is a
charge equivalent to 45% of the value of that minimum tick. In other
words, in penny quoted securities, where the price is improved by one
tick with an access fee of $0.45 per contract, an investor paying to
access that quote is still $0.55 better off than trading at the wider
spread, even without the access fee ($1.00 of price improvement less a
$0.45 access fee equals $0.55 better economics). This computation is
equally true for securities quoted in wider increments. Rebates and
access fees near the $0.85 per contract level equate to only 17% of the
value of the minimum tick in non-Penny Pilot issues, less than the
experience today in Penny Pilot issues. For example, a retail investor
transacting a single contract in a non-penny quoted security quoted a
single tick tighter than the rest of the market, and paying an access
fee of $0.79 per contract, is receiving an economic benefit of $4.21
($0.05 improved tick equals $5.00 in proceeds less $0.79 access fee,
which equals $4.21). The Exchange believes that encouraging LMMs and
Market Makers to quote more aggressively by giving credits to post
liquidity and incenting Customer orders to post on NYSE Arca will
narrow the spread in non-Penny Pilot issues to the benefit of investors
and all market participants by improving the overall economics of the
resulting transactions that occur on the Exchange, even if the access
fee paid in connection with such transactions is higher. Accordingly,
the Exchange believes that the proposed fees and rebates for the non-
Penny Pilot issues are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory.
As with Penny Pilot issues, there will be no fees for transactions
on the Opening Auction. The Exchange believes that this is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because it
[[Page 68166]]
would apply to trading interest from all market participants, and is
reasonable because a determination of posting liquidity or taking
liquidity is difficult prior to the establishment of the opening
market.
The Exchange believes the application of manual fees to orders
represented by a Floor Broker and partially executed against the
Consolidated Book are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory, because the fees are those expected by the market
participant that submits the order, and does not alter the fees or
credits expected by the market participant whose order or quote is
resting in the Consolidated Book.
The Exchange believes that eliminating Marketing Charges on the
Exchange is reasonable because it would eliminate a fee for Market
Makers and LMMs that the Exchange has decided to no longer apply in
light of the proposed application of Post-Take pricing to non-Penny
Pilot issues--currently, Marketing Charges do not apply to Penny Pilot
issues. This is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
charges are currently collected only from LMMs and Market Makers who
interact with Customer orders, and, as a result of the proposed change,
would no longer be collected from any participant on the Exchange. As a
result, Customers would receive direct credit for posted liquidity,
rather than a payment for order flow in an indirect manner.
Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
review, and consider adjusting, its fees and credits to remain
competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment.
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
The Exchange received one unsolicited, written comment on the
proposed rule change from an LMM on the Exchange. The LMM commented
that the proposed pricing structure would negatively impact its
business because it trades less liquid issues with wider markets, and
that the restructuring of the fees will not provide a sufficient
incentive to him to provide tighter markets to receive credits for
posting liquidity. The LMM also stated that the proposed pricing
structure will encourage order flow providers to send mid-market trades
(orders between the bid and offer) to the Exchange to collect payment
(posted liquidity credits) and gain priority, and then direct market-
taking orders to other exchanges where the order flow provider would
not be charged a market taker fee.
Additionally, the LMM believed that the proposed pricing structure
would encourage competition from Customers who would have an incentive
to improve on the LMM's markets to collect posted liquidity credits and
also gain priority, diminishing the value of being an OTP-holding
market maker on the Exchange. Lastly, the LMM commented that there
might or might not be an increase in order flow between the bid and
offer, but that other, more sophisticated firms would be more
competitive, and, therefore, the LMM would not see the benefits of the
proposed pricing structure.
In response to the LMM's statements, the Exchange believes, as
described above, that the proposed fee and rebate structure is
competitive and similar to other fees and rebates in place on other
exchanges. The LMM's complaints are that he will not be able to compete
against Customers or more sophisticated firms. The Exchange believes
that attracting Customer order flow benefits all market participants by
improving the quality of order interaction and executions at the
Exchange, including for Firms and Broker Dealers. Encouraging LMMs and
Market Makers to quote more aggressively by giving credits to post
liquidity and incenting Customer orders to post on NYSE Arca will
narrow the spread in non-Penny Pilot issues to the benefit of investors
and all market participants by improving the overall economics of the
resulting transactions that occur on the Exchange, and by increasing
competition between the LMM and Customers and competing Market Makers,
spreads will narrow and more attractive order flow will be available on
the Exchange, enhancing the markets for all participants.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \15\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \16\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the NYSE Arca.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend 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 email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2012-121 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2012-121. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090, on official business days between the hours
of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
[[Page 68167]]
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the NYSE's
principal office and on its Internet Web site at www.nyse.com. 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-NYSEARCA-2012-121, and
should be submitted on or before December 6, 2012.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-27712 Filed 11-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
