Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC Notice; of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Penny Pilot Options, 3060-3064 [2013-00634]
Download as PDF
3060
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 15, 2013 / Notices
basis to ensure that it remains
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory among all ETP Holders.
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. The Order
Delivery Notification Fee is a
mechanism under which the Exchange
can recoup the costs associated with
Order Delivery Mode. Order Delivery
Participants are eligible to submit (or
not submit) liquidity adding quotes, and
may do so at their discretion in the daily
volumes they choose during any given
trading day. The Order Delivery
Notification Fee is designed solely to
allow the Exchange to recover the costs
associated with operating Order
Delivery Mode and applies to all Order
Delivery participants. Therefore, the
Exchange does not believe the modified
Order Delivery Notification Fee imposes
any burden on completion that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange has neither solicited
nor received written comments on the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The proposed rule change has taken
effect upon filing pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Exchange Act 13
and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4.14
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.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
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:
13 15
14 17
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Jan 14, 2013
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–NSX–2012–27 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–NSX–2012–27. 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 on official business
days between the hours of 10:00 a.m.
and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also
will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal offices 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
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–NSX–
2012–27, and should be submitted on or
before February 5, 2013.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.15
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–00663 Filed 1–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
15 17
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
Frm 00122
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–68613; File No. SR–
NASDAQ–2012–141]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The
NASDAQ Stock Market LLC Notice; of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Penny Pilot Options
January 9, 2013.
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 December
31, 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC (‘‘NASDAQ’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’)
the proposed rule change as described
in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items
have been prepared by NASDAQ. 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
NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter
XV, Section 2 of the rules governing the
NASDAQ Options Market (‘‘NOM’’),
NASDAQ’s facility for executing and
routing standardized equity and index
options. Specifically, NOM proposes to
amend its pricing to modify the
Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options.3
While the changes proposed herein
are effective upon filing, the Exchange
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 The Penny Pilot was established in March 2008,
expanded in October 2009, and, through a series of
orders, extended through December 31, 2012. See
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57579 (March
28, 2008), 73 FR 18587 (April 4, 2008) (SR–
NASDAQ–2008–026) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness establishing Penny Pilot);
60874 (October 23, 2009), 74 FR 56682 (November
2, 2009) (SR–NASDAQ–2009–091) (notice of filing
and immediate effectiveness expanding and
extending Penny Pilot); 60965 (November 9, 2009),
74 FR 59292 (November 17, 2009) (SR–NASDAQ–
2009–097) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny
Pilot); 61455 (February 1, 2010), 75 FR 6239
(February 8, 2010) (SR–NASDAQ–2010–013)
(notice of filing and immediate effectiveness adding
seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot); 62029 (May 4,
2010), 75 FR 25895 (May 10, 2010) (SR–NASDAQ–
2010–053) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny
Pilot); 65969 (December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79268
(December 21, 2011) (SR–NASDAQ–2011–169)
(notice of filing and immediate effectiveness
extension and replacement of Penny Pilot); and
67325 (June 29, 2012), 77 FR 40127 (July 6, 2012)
(SR–NASDAQ–2012–075) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness and extension and
replacement of Penny Pilot through December 31,
2012). See also NOM Rules, Chapter VI, Section 5.
2 17
E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM
15JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 15, 2013 / Notices
has designated that the amendments be
operative on January 2, 2013.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s Web site
at https://
www.nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change. The text of
these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below.
The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below,
of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter
XV, entitled ‘‘Options Pricing,’’ at
Section 2(1) governing the rebates and
fees assessed for option orders entered
into NOM. The Exchange is proposing
to amend the Professional Rebate to Add
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options to
attract additional order flow to the
Exchange.
The Exchange currently pays a flat
Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options of $0.29 per
contract. The Exchange is now
proposing to pay Professionals, a tiered
rebate instead. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to eliminate the flat
$0.29 per contract Professional Rebate to
Add Liquidity and instead pay
Professionals rebates based on total
number of Customer and Professional
contracts that add liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options in a given month as
follows:
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
Monthly volume
Tier 1—Participant adds
Customer and Professional
liquidity of up to 34,999
contracts per day in a
month ................................
Tier 2—Participant adds
Customer and Professional
liquidity of 35,000 to
74,999 contracts per day
in a month .........................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Jan 14, 2013
Rebate to add
liquidity
$0.26
0.43
Jkt 229001
3061
more contracts per day in a month.6
Total Volume is defined to include
Customer, Professional, Firm, Non-NOM
Tier 3—Participant adds
Market Maker and NOM Market Maker
Customer and Professional
volume in Penny Pilot Options and
liquidity of 75,000 or more
Non-Penny Pilot Options which either
contracts per day in a
7
month ................................
0.44 adds or removes liquidity.
The Exchange proposes to apply the
Tier 4—Participant adds (1)
Rebate to Add Liquidity tiers to
Customer and Professional
Professionals transacting Penny Pilot
liquidity of 25,000 or more
contracts per day in a
Options. The Exchange proposes to
month, (2) the Participant
amend Chapter XV, Section 2 by noting
has certified for the Investhat the tiers would apply to
tor Support Program set
Professionals.
forth in Rule 7014; and (3)
Additionally, the Exchange also
the Participant executed at
proposes to add contracts executed in
least one order on
NASDAQ’s equity market
0.42 the ‘‘Professional’’ capacity to the tier
requirements. NOM Participants would
Tier 5—Participant has Total
be able to count Customer and
Volume of 130,000 or
Professional contracts toward the
more contracts per day in
a month .............................
0.46 number of contracts eligible to qualify
for a tier as specified herein. The
Professionals would be entitled to the addition of Professional orders to the
same Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny
number of contracts eligible for each
Pilot Options that Customers receive
rebate tier will enable NOM Participants
today. The Exchange would pay a Tier
to achieve higher rebates.
1 rebate of $0.26 per contract to market
2. Statutory Basis
participants that add Customer and
NASDAQ believes that the proposed
Professional liquidity of up to 34,999
rule changes are consistent with the
contracts per day in a month. A Tier 2
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,8 in
rebate would pay $0.43 per contract to
general, and with Section 6(b)(4) of the
market participants that add Customer
Act,9 in particular, in that it provides for
and Professional liquidity between
the equitable allocation of reasonable
35,000 and 74,999 contracts per day in
dues, fees and other charges among
a month. A Tier 3 rebate would pay a
members and issuers and other persons
$0.44 per contract rebate to market
using any facility or system which
participants that add Customer and
NASDAQ operates or controls.
Professional liquidity of 75,000
The Exchange believes that the
contracts or more per day in a month.
proposed tier structure for Professional
The Tier 4 rebate would pay a $0.42
Rebates to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot
rebate to market participants that add
Options is reasonable, equitable and not
Customer and Professional liquidity of
unfairly discriminatory because by
25,000 or more contracts per day in a
month. In addition, to qualify for Tier 4, incentivizing NOM Participants to select
the Exchange as a venue to post
the Participant must have certified for
the Investor Support Program (‘‘ISP’’) as Customer and Professional orders, the
set forth in Rule 7014; 4 and executed at Exchange will attract additional
Professional order flow to the benefit of
least one order on NASDAQ’s equity
all market participants.
market.5 The Tier 5 rebate would pay a
The Exchange believes that the
$0.46 per contract Rebate to Add
proposed monthly volume tier Rebates
Liquidity to NOM Options Participants
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options
that have Total Volume of 130,000 or
are equitable and not unfairly
4 For a detailed description of the ISP, see
discriminatory because members that
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63270
account for more volume would be able
(November 8, 2010), 75 FR 69489 (November 12,
to add greater value to the Exchange’s
2010) (NASDAQ–2010–141) (notice of filing and
trading environment. Additionally, with
immediate effectiveness). See also Securities
the exception of Tier 1, Professionals
Exchange Act Release Nos. 63414 (December 2,
2010), 75 FR 76505 (December 8, 2010) (NASDAQ–
will have an opportunity to earn higher
2010–153) (notice of filing and immediate
rebates than they earned in the past.
Monthly volume
Rebate to add
liquidity
effectiveness); and 63628 (January 3, 2011), 76 FR
1201 (January 7, 2011) (NASDAQ–2010–154)
(notice of filing and immediate effectiveness).
5 For purposes of Tier 4, the Exchange will allow
a NOM Participant to qualify for the rebate if a
NASDAQ member under common ownership with
the NOM Participant has certified for the Investor
Support Program and executed at least one order on
NASDAQ’s equity market. Common ownership is
defined as 75 percent common ownership or
control.
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6 For purposes of Tier 5, the Exchange allows
NOM Participants under common ownership to
aggregate their volume to qualify for the rebate.
Common ownership is defined as 75 percent
common ownership or control.
7 See the Exchange’s Rules at Chapter XV, Section
2.
8 15 U.S.C. 78f.
9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM
15JAN1
3062
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 15, 2013 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
With respect to Tier 1, the Exchange is
proposing to pay a $0.26 per contract
Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options as compared to a $0.29 per
contract rebate. The Exchange believes
that this proposal is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the
Professional has an opportunity to earn
higher rebates with the tier structure as
compared the current $0.29 per contract
Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options. In addition, the Exchange
believes that the proposed monthly tier
structure for Professional Rebates to
Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange
would uniformly pay a Rebate to Add
Liquidity to Professionals executing
Penny Pilot Options based on the
monthly tiers proposed herein.
The Exchange believes that paying
Professionals a tiered Rebate to Add
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options as
proposed herein is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory as compared to
other market participants. For example,
Customers are entitled to the same
rebates. NOM Market Makers are
entitled to a $0.30 per contract Rebate
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options, and that rebate is higher than
Professionals that achieve a Tier 1
rebate because NOM Market Makers add
value through continuous quoting 10 and
the commitment of capital. With respect
to Tiers 2, 3 and 4, pursuant to this
proposal, a Professional earns a higher
rebate as compared to a NOM Market
Maker. In addition, a Professional
would earn a higher rebate with any tier
as compared to a Firm and Non-NOM
Market Maker. Today, Professionals are
paid a higher Rebate to Add Liquidity
in Penny Pilot Options as compared to
Firms and Non-NOM Market Makers
however the differential would become
larger. The Exchange believes that
paying Professionals higher Tier 2, 3
and 4 rebates as compared to NOM
Market Makers and paying Professionals
higher rebates as compared to Firms and
Non-NOM Market Makers is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because
the Exchange does not believe that the
amount of the rebate offered by the
10 Pursuant to Chapter VII (Market Participants),
Section 5 (Obligations of Market Makers), in
registering as a market maker, an Options
Participant commits himself to various obligations.
Transactions of a Market Maker in its market
making capacity must constitute a course of
dealings reasonably calculated to contribute to the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and
Market Makers should not make bids or offers or
enter into transactions that are inconsistent with
such course of dealings. Further, all Market Makers
are designated as specialists on NOM for all
purposes under the Act or rules thereunder. See
Chapter VII, Section 5.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Jan 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
Exchange has a material impact on a
NOM Participant’s ability to execute
orders in Penny Pilot Options. The
Exchange has been assessing the impact
of rebates since it first began to offer
them and has also observed the impact
of fees and rebates on other options
exchanges in terms of quoting and
liquidity. The Exchange believes that
the Fees for Adding Liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options, as compared to rebates,
impact a market participant’s decisionmaking more prominently with respect
to posting order flow on different
venues and price. In modifying its
rebates, the Exchange hopes to simply
remain competitive with other venues
so that it remains a choice for market
participants when posting orders and
the result may be additional
Professional order flow for the
Exchange. In addition, a NOM
Participant may not be able to gauge the
exact rebate tier it would qualify for
until the end of the month because
Professional volume would be
commingled with Customer volume in
calculating tier volume. Other
participants have a known rebate rate at
which they would execute the entire
month. A Professional could only
otherwise presume the Tier 1 rebate
would be achieved in a month when
determining price.
The Exchange initially established
Professional pricing in order to ‘‘* * *
bring additional revenue to the
Exchange.’’ 11 The Exchange noted in
the Professional Filing that it believes
‘‘* * * that the increased revenue from
the proposal would assist the Exchange
to recoup fixed costs.’’ 12 Further, the
Exchange noted in that filing that it
believes that establishing separate
pricing for a Professional, which ranges
between that of a Customer and market
maker, accomplishes this objective.13
Herein, the Exchange is not proposing to
amend fees, which fees continue to meet
the objectives noted in the Professional
11 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64494
(May 13, 2011), 76 FR 29014 (May 19, 2011) (SR–
NASDAQ–2011–066) (‘‘Professional Filing’’). In this
filing, the Exchange addressed the perceived
favorable pricing of Professionals who were
assessed fees and paid rebates like a Customer prior
to the filing. The Exchange noted in that filing that
a Professional, unlike a retail Customer, has access
to sophisticated trading systems that contain
functionality not available to retail Customers.
12 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64494
(May 13, 2011), 76 FR 29014 (May 19, 2011) (SR–
NASDAQ–2011–066).
13 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64494
(May 13, 2011), 76 FR 29014 (May 19, 2011) (SR–
NASDAQ–2011–066) The Exchange also in the
Professional Filing that it believes the role of the
retail Customer in the marketplace is distinct from
that of the Professional and the Exchange’s fee
proposal at that time accounted for this distinction
by pricing each market participant according to
their roles and obligations.
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Filing. Rather, the Exchange desires to
amend the rebates it pays because it
believes that NOM Participants would
view NOM as a favorable venue to
transact Professional volume. The
Exchange does not believe that
providing Professionals with the
opportunity to obtain higher rebates
would create a competitive environment
where Professionals would be
necessarily advantaged on NOM as
compared to other NOM Market Makers,
Firms or Non-NOM Market Makers.
First, a Professional would be assessed
the same fees as these other market
participants, as is the case today.
Second, a Professional only has the
opportunity to achieve the higher rebate
by sending in more than 35,000
contracts, otherwise the Professional
only achieves a Tier 1 rebate with at
least one trade and the differential in
that scenario as between market
participants remain the same.14 The
Exchange recognizes that the rebate tiers
provide an incentive to Professionals,
but it is not a guaranteed rebate.
Additionally, the Exchange believes
the proposed tiered Rebates to Add
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options are
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the rebates are
similar to a tiered rebate offered by
NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’). NYSE
Arca pays a per contract rate on all
posted liquidity in Customer Penny
Pilot Issues by aggregating total
contracts from customer posted orders
in Penny Pilot Issues in a given
month.15 Of note, NYSE Arca does not
have a professional category similar to
NOM and therefore, orders that would
otherwise be classified as Professionals
orders on NOM 16 are being counted
towards customer volume at NYSE
Arca.
The Exchange proposes to count both
Customer and Professional orders in the
number of contracts eligible for the
Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options. NOM Participants would
14 If a Professional earned a Tier 1 rebate, the
Professional would continue to receive a lower
rebate as compared to a NOM Market Maker and a
higher rebate as compared to a Firm and a NonNOM Market Maker, as is the case today. The rebate
differential, however, for a Professional as
compared to a Firm and a Non-NOM Market Maker
would be lower than it is today.
15 See NYSE Arca’s Fee Schedule.
16 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63028
(October 1, 2010), 75 FR 62443 (October 8, 2010)
(SR–NASDAQ–2012–099). In this rule filing, the
Exchange noted that NOM Participants will be
required appropriately to mark all Professional
orders. To comply with this requirement,
Participants will be required to review their Public
Customers’ activity on at least a quarterly basis to
determine whether orders that are not for the
account of a broker-dealer should be represented as
Professional orders.
E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM
15JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 15, 2013 / Notices
benefit from the addition of Professional
orders to the number of contracts
eligible for the rebate and as a result
may qualify for a higher tier. The
Exchange believes the addition of
Professional orders to the types of
orders eligible for a rebate tier is
reasonable because it will incentivize
NOM Participants to send additional
Professional orders to the Exchange as
well as Customer orders. The Exchange
believes that adding Professional orders
to the types of orders eligible for a
rebate tier is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because all NOM
Participants will benefit from the
additional liquidity the amendment may
attract to the Exchange as a result of the
increased incentive to send Professional
as well as Customer orders. Also, all
NOM Participants are eligible for the
rebate and are able to earn a rebate by
simply transacting one Customer or
Professional order in a Penny Pilot
Option.17
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
NASDAQ does not believe that the
proposed rule changes will result in any
burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
While the Exchange’s proposal would
result in a Professional receiving a
higher rebate as compared to a NOM
Market Maker if a Professional qualified
for a Tier 2, 3 or 4 rebate and the
differential in the rebate would increase
as between a Professional and a Firm
and a Non-NOM Market Maker, the
Exchange does not believe the proposed
rebate tiers would result in any burden
on competition as between market
participants on NOM. The Exchange
does not believe that the amount of the
rebate offered by the Exchange has a
material impact on a NOM Participant’s
ability to execute orders in Penny Pilot
Options.
The Exchange has been assessing the
impact of rebates since it first began to
offer them and has also observed the
impact of fees and rebates on other
options exchanges in terms of quoting
and liquidity. The Exchange believes
that the Fees for Adding Liquidity, as
compared to rebates, impact a market
participant’s decision-making more
prominently with respect to posting
order flow on different venues and
price. The Exchange does not believe
that allowing a Professional to obtain a
higher rebate than other market
17 A NOM Participant qualifies for a Tier 1 rebate
of $0.26 per contract by adding Customer and
Professional liquidity of up to 34,999 contracts per
day in a month.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Jan 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
participants, if a certain number of
contracts where to be executed on the
Exchange, results in a burden on
competition among market participants
on NOM for the reasons noted herein.
The Exchange believes that offering
Professionals the proposed tiered
rebates creates competition among
options exchanges because the
Exchange believes that the rebates may
cause market participants to select NOM
as a venue to send Professional order
flow. The fees that the Exchange
assesses are not being amended with
this proposal, rather the Exchange is
offering to pay increased rebates in
exchange for additional Professional
order flow being executed at the
Exchange, which additional order flow
should benefit other market
participants.
The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market comprised of eleven
U.S. options exchanges in which
sophisticated and knowledgeable
market participants can readily send
order flow to competing exchanges if
they deem fee levels at a particular
exchange to be excessive. The Exchange
believes that the proposed rebate
structure and tiers are competitive with
rebates and tiers in place on other
exchanges. The Exchange believes that
this competitive marketplace impacts
the rebates present on the Exchange
today and substantially influences the
proposals set forth above.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either
solicited or received.
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)(ii) of the Act.18 At any time
within 60 days of the filing of the
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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.
18 15
PO 00000
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–NASDAQ–2012–141 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–NASDAQ–2012–141. 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
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
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–
NASDAQ–2012–141, and should be
submitted on or before February 5, 2013.
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
Frm 00125
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3063
E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM
15JAN1
3064
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 15, 2013 / Notices
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.19
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–00634 Filed 1–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Self-Regulatory Organizations; New
York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change Increasing the
Fees Paid by Participants in the
Exchange’s Medallion Signature
Program From $1,000 per Year to
$1,300 per Year
January 9, 2013.
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 December
28, 2012, New York Stock Exchange
LLC (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE’’) 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 the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested
persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to increase
the fees paid by participants in the
Exchange’s medallion signature program
from $1,000 per year to $1,300 per year.
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.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
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.
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Jan 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
[Release No. 34–68607; File No. SR–NYSE–
2012–80]
19 17
The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below,
of the most significant parts of such
statements.
The Exchange proposes to change the
application and annual charge to be
paid by participants in the medallion
signature program (‘‘MSP’’) maintained
by the NYSE from $1,000 to $1,300 per
year. In 1992, the Securities and
Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’)
approved NYSE’s conversion of its
existing signature service program to a
signature guarantee program, now
referred to as the MSP.3 At that time, the
NYSE specified that participants in the
MSP would bear the administrative
expenses in connection with the
program, which at that time was a
charge of $300 to be paid upon filing an
application to the program and annually
thereafter. The $300 charge to
participants in the MSP was increased
to $1,000 as of January 1, 2005.4
The Exchange has recently entered
into a new agreement with the outside
vendor that administers the MSP and
the fees paid by the Exchange to that
outside vendor have increased
significantly. In addition, the
Exchange’s internal administrative and
regulatory costs in relation to the MSP
have increased significantly since the
fees were last increased eight years ago.
Consequently, effective January 1, 2013,
the Exchange will increase the charge to
members participating in the MSP to
$1,300. This charge will be payable
upon a participant’s filing of an
application to the MSP and annually
thereafter. The NYSE will bill MSP
participants the increased fee for 2013
in January 2013.
The proposed changes are not
otherwise intended to address any other
problem, and the Exchange is not aware
of any significant problem that the
affected market participants would have
in complying with the proposed
changes.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 31388
(October 30, 1992), 57 FR 53366 (November 9, 1992)
(SR–NYSE–92–16) (order approving
implementation of a signature guarantee program).
The MSP is governed by NYSE Rule 200.
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51190
(February 11, 2005), 70 FR 8867 (February 23, 2005)
(SR–NYSE–2005–06).
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Section 6(b) 5 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’), in general, and
furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) 6 and 6(b)(5) 7 of the Act, 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 believes that the proposed fee
is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory in that it is charged only
to those member organizations that
voluntarily participate in the MSP. The
Exchange believes that the proposed fee
is reasonable in that it is closely related
to the Exchange’s actual costs in
administering the program.
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 purpose of the Act. In particular,
the proposed fee only will be charged to
those member organizations that
voluntarily participate in the MSP. In
addition, the increased fee amount
correlates to the increased costs to the
Exchange for administering the
program.
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 is effective
upon filing pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) 8 of the Act and
subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 9
thereunder, because it establishes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by NYSE.
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.
5 15
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
7 15 U.S.C. 78a.
8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
6 15
E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM
15JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3060-3064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00634]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-68613; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2012-141]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
Notice; of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Penny Pilot Options
January 9, 2013.
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 December 31, 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by NASDAQ.
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
NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter XV, Section 2 of the rules
governing the NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM''), NASDAQ's facility for
executing and routing standardized equity and index options.
Specifically, NOM proposes to amend its pricing to modify the
Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Penny Pilot was established in March 2008, expanded in
October 2009, and, through a series of orders, extended through
December 31, 2012. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57579
(March 28, 2008), 73 FR 18587 (April 4, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2008-026)
(notice of filing and immediate effectiveness establishing Penny
Pilot); 60874 (October 23, 2009), 74 FR 56682 (November 2, 2009)
(SR-NASDAQ-2009-091) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness
expanding and extending Penny Pilot); 60965 (November 9, 2009), 74
FR 59292 (November 17, 2009) (SR-NASDAQ-2009-097) (notice of filing
and immediate effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny
Pilot); 61455 (February 1, 2010), 75 FR 6239 (February 8, 2010) (SR-
NASDAQ-2010-013) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness
adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot); 62029 (May 4, 2010), 75
FR 25895 (May 10, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-053) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot);
65969 (December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79268 (December 21, 2011) (SR-
NASDAQ-2011-169) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness
extension and replacement of Penny Pilot); and 67325 (June 29,
2012), 77 FR 40127 (July 6, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-075) (notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of
Penny Pilot through December 31, 2012). See also NOM Rules, Chapter
VI, Section 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the
Exchange
[[Page 3061]]
has designated that the amendments be operative on January 2, 2013.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at https://www.nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter XV, entitled ``Options Pricing,''
at Section 2(1) governing the rebates and fees assessed for option
orders entered into NOM. The Exchange is proposing to amend the
Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options to attract
additional order flow to the Exchange.
The Exchange currently pays a flat Professional Rebate to Add
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options of $0.29 per contract. The Exchange is
now proposing to pay Professionals, a tiered rebate instead.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the flat $0.29 per
contract Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity and instead pay
Professionals rebates based on total number of Customer and
Professional contracts that add liquidity in Penny Pilot Options in a
given month as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rebate to add
Monthly volume liquidity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1--Participant adds Customer and Professional $0.26
liquidity of up to 34,999 contracts per day in a month.
Tier 2--Participant adds Customer and Professional 0.43
liquidity of 35,000 to 74,999 contracts per day in a
month..................................................
Tier 3--Participant adds Customer and Professional 0.44
liquidity of 75,000 or more contracts per day in a
month..................................................
Tier 4--Participant adds (1) Customer and Professional 0.42
liquidity of 25,000 or more contracts per day in a
month, (2) the Participant has certified for the
Investor Support Program set forth in Rule 7014; and
(3) the Participant executed at least one order on
NASDAQ's equity market.................................
Tier 5--Participant has Total Volume of 130,000 or more 0.46
contracts per day in a month...........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Professionals would be entitled to the same Rebate to Add Liquidity
in Penny Pilot Options that Customers receive today. The Exchange would
pay a Tier 1 rebate of $0.26 per contract to market participants that
add Customer and Professional liquidity of up to 34,999 contracts per
day in a month. A Tier 2 rebate would pay $0.43 per contract to market
participants that add Customer and Professional liquidity between
35,000 and 74,999 contracts per day in a month. A Tier 3 rebate would
pay a $0.44 per contract rebate to market participants that add
Customer and Professional liquidity of 75,000 contracts or more per day
in a month. The Tier 4 rebate would pay a $0.42 rebate to market
participants that add Customer and Professional liquidity of 25,000 or
more contracts per day in a month. In addition, to qualify for Tier 4,
the Participant must have certified for the Investor Support Program
(``ISP'') as set forth in Rule 7014; \4\ and executed at least one
order on NASDAQ's equity market.\5\ The Tier 5 rebate would pay a $0.46
per contract Rebate to Add Liquidity to NOM Options Participants that
have Total Volume of 130,000 or more contracts per day in a month.\6\
Total Volume is defined to include Customer, Professional, Firm, Non-
NOM Market Maker and NOM Market Maker volume in Penny Pilot Options and
Non-Penny Pilot Options which either adds or removes liquidity.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For a detailed description of the ISP, see Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 63270 (November 8, 2010), 75 FR 69489
(November 12, 2010) (NASDAQ-2010-141) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness). See also Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 63414 (December 2, 2010), 75 FR 76505 (December 8, 2010)
(NASDAQ-2010-153) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness);
and 63628 (January 3, 2011), 76 FR 1201 (January 7, 2011) (NASDAQ-
2010-154) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness).
\5\ For purposes of Tier 4, the Exchange will allow a NOM
Participant to qualify for the rebate if a NASDAQ member under
common ownership with the NOM Participant has certified for the
Investor Support Program and executed at least one order on NASDAQ's
equity market. Common ownership is defined as 75 percent common
ownership or control.
\6\ For purposes of Tier 5, the Exchange allows NOM Participants
under common ownership to aggregate their volume to qualify for the
rebate. Common ownership is defined as 75 percent common ownership
or control.
\7\ See the Exchange's Rules at Chapter XV, Section 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to apply the Rebate to Add Liquidity tiers to
Professionals transacting Penny Pilot Options. The Exchange proposes to
amend Chapter XV, Section 2 by noting that the tiers would apply to
Professionals.
Additionally, the Exchange also proposes to add contracts executed
in the ``Professional'' capacity to the tier requirements. NOM
Participants would be able to count Customer and Professional contracts
toward the number of contracts eligible to qualify for a tier as
specified herein. The addition of Professional orders to the number of
contracts eligible for each rebate tier will enable NOM Participants to
achieve higher rebates.
2. Statutory Basis
NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\8\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among
members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system
which NASDAQ operates or controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed tier structure for
Professional Rebates to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because by
incentivizing NOM Participants to select the Exchange as a venue to
post Customer and Professional orders, the Exchange will attract
additional Professional order flow to the benefit of all market
participants.
The Exchange believes that the proposed monthly volume tier Rebates
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because members that account for more volume would be
able to add greater value to the Exchange's trading environment.
Additionally, with the exception of Tier 1, Professionals will have an
opportunity to earn higher rebates than they earned in the past.
[[Page 3062]]
With respect to Tier 1, the Exchange is proposing to pay a $0.26 per
contract Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options as compared to
a $0.29 per contract rebate. The Exchange believes that this proposal
is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the Professional
has an opportunity to earn higher rebates with the tier structure as
compared the current $0.29 per contract Rebate to Add Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options. In addition, the Exchange believes that the
proposed monthly tier structure for Professional Rebates to Add
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange would uniformly pay a Rebate to Add
Liquidity to Professionals executing Penny Pilot Options based on the
monthly tiers proposed herein.
The Exchange believes that paying Professionals a tiered Rebate to
Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options as proposed herein is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory as compared to other market
participants. For example, Customers are entitled to the same rebates.
NOM Market Makers are entitled to a $0.30 per contract Rebate to Add
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options, and that rebate is higher than
Professionals that achieve a Tier 1 rebate because NOM Market Makers
add value through continuous quoting \10\ and the commitment of
capital. With respect to Tiers 2, 3 and 4, pursuant to this proposal, a
Professional earns a higher rebate as compared to a NOM Market Maker.
In addition, a Professional would earn a higher rebate with any tier as
compared to a Firm and Non-NOM Market Maker. Today, Professionals are
paid a higher Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options as
compared to Firms and Non-NOM Market Makers however the differential
would become larger. The Exchange believes that paying Professionals
higher Tier 2, 3 and 4 rebates as compared to NOM Market Makers and
paying Professionals higher rebates as compared to Firms and Non-NOM
Market Makers is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange does not believe that the amount of the rebate offered by the
Exchange has a material impact on a NOM Participant's ability to
execute orders in Penny Pilot Options. The Exchange has been assessing
the impact of rebates since it first began to offer them and has also
observed the impact of fees and rebates on other options exchanges in
terms of quoting and liquidity. The Exchange believes that the Fees for
Adding Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options, as compared to rebates, impact
a market participant's decision-making more prominently with respect to
posting order flow on different venues and price. In modifying its
rebates, the Exchange hopes to simply remain competitive with other
venues so that it remains a choice for market participants when posting
orders and the result may be additional Professional order flow for the
Exchange. In addition, a NOM Participant may not be able to gauge the
exact rebate tier it would qualify for until the end of the month
because Professional volume would be commingled with Customer volume in
calculating tier volume. Other participants have a known rebate rate at
which they would execute the entire month. A Professional could only
otherwise presume the Tier 1 rebate would be achieved in a month when
determining price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Pursuant to Chapter VII (Market Participants), Section 5
(Obligations of Market Makers), in registering as a market maker, an
Options Participant commits himself to various obligations.
Transactions of a Market Maker in its market making capacity must
constitute a course of dealings reasonably calculated to contribute
to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and Market Makers
should not make bids or offers or enter into transactions that are
inconsistent with such course of dealings. Further, all Market
Makers are designated as specialists on NOM for all purposes under
the Act or rules thereunder. See Chapter VII, Section 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange initially established Professional pricing in order to
``* * * bring additional revenue to the Exchange.'' \11\ The Exchange
noted in the Professional Filing that it believes ``* * * that the
increased revenue from the proposal would assist the Exchange to recoup
fixed costs.'' \12\ Further, the Exchange noted in that filing that it
believes that establishing separate pricing for a Professional, which
ranges between that of a Customer and market maker, accomplishes this
objective.\13\ Herein, the Exchange is not proposing to amend fees,
which fees continue to meet the objectives noted in the Professional
Filing. Rather, the Exchange desires to amend the rebates it pays
because it believes that NOM Participants would view NOM as a favorable
venue to transact Professional volume. The Exchange does not believe
that providing Professionals with the opportunity to obtain higher
rebates would create a competitive environment where Professionals
would be necessarily advantaged on NOM as compared to other NOM Market
Makers, Firms or Non-NOM Market Makers. First, a Professional would be
assessed the same fees as these other market participants, as is the
case today. Second, a Professional only has the opportunity to achieve
the higher rebate by sending in more than 35,000 contracts, otherwise
the Professional only achieves a Tier 1 rebate with at least one trade
and the differential in that scenario as between market participants
remain the same.\14\ The Exchange recognizes that the rebate tiers
provide an incentive to Professionals, but it is not a guaranteed
rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64494 (May 13,
2011), 76 FR 29014 (May 19, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-066)
(``Professional Filing''). In this filing, the Exchange addressed
the perceived favorable pricing of Professionals who were assessed
fees and paid rebates like a Customer prior to the filing. The
Exchange noted in that filing that a Professional, unlike a retail
Customer, has access to sophisticated trading systems that contain
functionality not available to retail Customers.
\12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64494 (May 13,
2011), 76 FR 29014 (May 19, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-066).
\13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64494 (May 13,
2011), 76 FR 29014 (May 19, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-066) The Exchange
also in the Professional Filing that it believes the role of the
retail Customer in the marketplace is distinct from that of the
Professional and the Exchange's fee proposal at that time accounted
for this distinction by pricing each market participant according to
their roles and obligations.
\14\ If a Professional earned a Tier 1 rebate, the Professional
would continue to receive a lower rebate as compared to a NOM Market
Maker and a higher rebate as compared to a Firm and a Non-NOM Market
Maker, as is the case today. The rebate differential, however, for a
Professional as compared to a Firm and a Non-NOM Market Maker would
be lower than it is today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed tiered Rebates to
Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options are reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the rebates are similar to a tiered
rebate offered by NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''). NYSE Arca pays a per
contract rate on all posted liquidity in Customer Penny Pilot Issues by
aggregating total contracts from customer posted orders in Penny Pilot
Issues in a given month.\15\ Of note, NYSE Arca does not have a
professional category similar to NOM and therefore, orders that would
otherwise be classified as Professionals orders on NOM \16\ are being
counted towards customer volume at NYSE Arca.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See NYSE Arca's Fee Schedule.
\16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63028 (October 1,
2010), 75 FR 62443 (October 8, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-099). In this
rule filing, the Exchange noted that NOM Participants will be
required appropriately to mark all Professional orders. To comply
with this requirement, Participants will be required to review their
Public Customers' activity on at least a quarterly basis to
determine whether orders that are not for the account of a broker-
dealer should be represented as Professional orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to count both Customer and Professional
orders in the number of contracts eligible for the Rebate to Add
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options. NOM Participants would
[[Page 3063]]
benefit from the addition of Professional orders to the number of
contracts eligible for the rebate and as a result may qualify for a
higher tier. The Exchange believes the addition of Professional orders
to the types of orders eligible for a rebate tier is reasonable because
it will incentivize NOM Participants to send additional Professional
orders to the Exchange as well as Customer orders. The Exchange
believes that adding Professional orders to the types of orders
eligible for a rebate tier is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because all NOM Participants will benefit from the additional liquidity
the amendment may attract to the Exchange as a result of the increased
incentive to send Professional as well as Customer orders. Also, all
NOM Participants are eligible for the rebate and are able to earn a
rebate by simply transacting one Customer or Professional order in a
Penny Pilot Option.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ A NOM Participant qualifies for a Tier 1 rebate of $0.26
per contract by adding Customer and Professional liquidity of up to
34,999 contracts per day in a month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule changes will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
While the Exchange's proposal would result in a Professional
receiving a higher rebate as compared to a NOM Market Maker if a
Professional qualified for a Tier 2, 3 or 4 rebate and the differential
in the rebate would increase as between a Professional and a Firm and a
Non-NOM Market Maker, the Exchange does not believe the proposed rebate
tiers would result in any burden on competition as between market
participants on NOM. The Exchange does not believe that the amount of
the rebate offered by the Exchange has a material impact on a NOM
Participant's ability to execute orders in Penny Pilot Options.
The Exchange has been assessing the impact of rebates since it
first began to offer them and has also observed the impact of fees and
rebates on other options exchanges in terms of quoting and liquidity.
The Exchange believes that the Fees for Adding Liquidity, as compared
to rebates, impact a market participant's decision-making more
prominently with respect to posting order flow on different venues and
price. The Exchange does not believe that allowing a Professional to
obtain a higher rebate than other market participants, if a certain
number of contracts where to be executed on the Exchange, results in a
burden on competition among market participants on NOM for the reasons
noted herein.
The Exchange believes that offering Professionals the proposed
tiered rebates creates competition among options exchanges because the
Exchange believes that the rebates may cause market participants to
select NOM as a venue to send Professional order flow. The fees that
the Exchange assesses are not being amended with this proposal, rather
the Exchange is offering to pay increased rebates in exchange for
additional Professional order flow being executed at the Exchange,
which additional order flow should benefit other market participants.
The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market comprised of
eleven U.S. options exchanges in which sophisticated and knowledgeable
market participants can readily send order flow to competing exchanges
if they deem fee levels at a particular exchange to be excessive. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rebate structure and tiers are
competitive with rebates and tiers in place on other exchanges. The
Exchange believes that this competitive marketplace impacts the rebates
present on the Exchange today and substantially influences the
proposals set forth above.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either solicited or received.
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)(ii) of the Act.\18\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the 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. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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-NASDAQ-2012-141 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-NASDAQ-2012-141. 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 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
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NASDAQ-2012-141, and should be submitted on or before February 5, 2013.
[[Page 3064]]
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00634 Filed 1-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P