Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule, 18104-18106 [2014-07054]
Download as PDF
18104
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Notices
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.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.23
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
[FR Doc. 2014–07039 Filed 3–28–14; 8:45 am]
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–2014–025 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NASDAQ–2014–025. 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, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
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–2014–025, and should be
submitted on or before April 21, 2014.
18:10 Mar 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
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:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–71789; File No. SR–CBOE–
2014–023]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the Fees
Schedule
March 25, 2014.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on March 12,
2014, Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or
‘‘CBOE’’) 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. 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 its
Fees Schedule. The text of the proposed
rule change is available on the
Exchange’s Web site (https://
www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/
CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at
the Exchange’s Office of the Secretary,
and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
23 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its
Fees Schedule, specifically regarding
the CBOE Command Connectivity
Charges. Currently, for every 15 Trading
Permits that a Trading Permit Holder
(‘‘TPH’’) that access CBOE Command
via CMI holds, that TPH receives one
CAS Server (plus one total backup CAS
Server regardless of the number of
Trading Permits that the TPH holds).
This would mean that a TPH who had,
say, 29 Trading Permits would only
receive one CAS Server (plus the
backup). The Exchange proposes to
instead add a chart listing the amounts
of Trading Permits and corresponding
CAS Servers: 3
Trading
Permits
1–15 ..............
16–30 ............
31–45 ............
46–60 ............
61–75 ............
76–90 ............
91+ ................
CAS Servers
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
backup
backup
backup
backup
backup
backup
backup
Total CAS
Servers
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
The effect of this change would be to
increase the number of CAS Servers that
many TPHs receive (for example, a TPH
that has 29 permits would now receive
two CAS Servers (plus a backup) before
having to pay for an extra CAS Server
(which costs $10,000 per month), so
TPHs may be able to save $10,000.
The Exchange also proposes to change
its calculation of the volume thresholds
for its Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale,
which provides for reduced transaction
fees for Market-Makers that reach
certain volume thresholds.4 Currently,
the volume thresholds are based on total
national Market-Maker multiply-listed
options volume. However, this does not
account for products traded solely on
3 Corresponding to this change, the Exchange
proposes to delete from the ‘‘Notes’’ section
regarding this fee the language ‘‘For every 15
Trading Permits that a TPH that accesses CBOE
Command via CMI holds, that TPH receives one
CAS Server (plus one total backup CAS Server
regardless of the number of Trading Permits that the
TPH holds).’’ That language will be replaced with
the statement: ‘‘TPHs will receive CAS Servers
based on the number of trading permits a TPH
holds.’’
4 The Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale applies in
all products except mini-options, SPX, SPXpm,
SRO, VIX or other VOLATILITY INDEXES, OEX or
XEO (the ‘‘Excluded Products’’). For more
information regarding the Liquidity Provider
Sliding Scale, see the CBOE Fees Schedule.
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Notices
CBOE (except the Excluded Products),
but it does include volume from
multiply-listed options that may not be
traded on CBOE. Because the Liquidity
Provider Sliding Scale provides for
transaction fees for transactions that
occur on CBOE, the Exchange believes
that it makes sense to include towards
the volume thresholds transaction
volume that occurs on CBOE (even if it
is in products traded only on CBOE) and
not include towards the volume
thresholds transaction volume in
products that may not be listed on
CBOE. As such, the Exchange proposes
to state that, for the Liquidity Provider
Sliding Scale, volume thresholds are
based on total national Market-Maker
volume of any options classes listed on
CBOE with traded volume on CBOE
during the calendar month. This will
continue to exclude the Excluded
Products.
The Exchange always strives for
clarity in its rules and Fees Schedule, so
that market participants may best
understand how rules and fees apply.
As such, the Exchange proposes a
number of changes to clarify its Fees
Schedule.
Footnote 22 of the Exchange Fees
Schedule states that ‘‘For all nonfacilitation business executed in AIM or
open outcry, or as a QCC or FLEX
transaction, transaction fees for Clearing
Trading Permit Holder Proprietary and/
or their Non-Trading Permit Holder
Affiliates (as defined in footnote 11) in
all products except SPX, SPXpm, VIX or
other volatility indexes, OEX or XEO, in
the aggregate, are capped at $75,000 per
month per Clearing Trading Permit
Holder.’’ The Exchange has never
considered surcharges to be ‘‘transaction
fees’’, as surcharges are assessed on top
of transaction fees and often are adopted
to offset the costs of licensing and/or
developing specific Exchange products
and systems. Additionally, surcharges
appear separately on the invoices the
Exchange provides to TPHs. As such,
the Exchange proposes to explicitly
state in Footnote 22 that ‘‘Surcharge fees
do not count towards the cap.’’
The Exchange also proposes to clarify
its CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding
Scale (the ‘‘Sliding Scale’’), pursuant to
which Clearing Trading Permit Holder
Proprietary transaction fees and
transaction fees for Non-Trading Permit
Holder Affiliates in OEX, XEO, SPX,
SPXpm, VIX and VOLATILITY
INDEXES in a month will be reduced
provided a Clearing Trading Permit
Holder reaches certain ADV thresholds
in multiply-listed options on the
Exchange in a month. Effective January
2, 2014, the Exchange amended the
Sliding Scale to change the different tier
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:10 Mar 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
thresholds from nominal contracts per
month thresholds to relative contracts
per month thresholds.5 Indeed, the
Exchange added to the ‘‘Notes’’ section
of the Sliding Scale table the following
language: ‘‘Transaction fees in OEX,
XEO, SPX, SPXpm, VIX and
VOLATILITY INDEXES will be reduced
based on reaching the percentage
thresholds in OEX, XEO, SPX, SPXpm,
VIX and VOLATILITY INDEXES listed
in the table.’’ However, the Exchange
feels that more clarity can be achieved
by more accurately describing what
those percentages are of (the
denominator in the percentage
calculation). As such, the Exchange
proposes to add the following language:
‘‘Percentages are calculated by
accounting for all volume in OEX, XEO,
SPX, SPXpm, VIX and VOLATILITY
INDEXES executed with an ‘‘F’’ or ‘‘L’’
Origin Code.’’
The Exchange also proposes to clarify
a statement in Footnote 11. The end of
Footnote 11 reads: ‘‘For facilitation
orders (other than SPX, SPXpm, SRO,
VIX or other volatility indexes, OEX or
XEO) (‘‘facilitation orders’’ for this
purpose to be defined as any paired
order in which a Clearing Trading
Permit Holder (F) origin code or NonTrading Permit Holder Affiliate (‘‘L’’
origin code) is contra to any other origin
code, provided the same executing
broker and clearing firm are on both
sides of the order) executed
electronically (including in AIM), open
outcry, or as a QCC or FLEX transaction,
CBOE will assess no Clearing Trading
Permit Holder Proprietary transaction
fees.’’ However, there are a number of
clarifications necessary to that
statement. First, there is no way,
systematically, for orders that are
executed in open outcry to be identified
as being ‘‘paired’’. The only way to
identify an open outcry order as being
‘‘facilitated’’ is for it to have the same
executing broker and clearing firm on
both sides. However, it is inaccurate to
say ‘‘both sides of the order’’ when
referring to open outcry, as, since they
are not paired, they come in separately
and therefore the word ‘‘order’’ should
be replaced with the word
‘‘transaction’’.
Further, the only way for a non-FLEX,
non-QCC paired facilitation order to be
executed electronically is via AIM. The
current language could be read to
indicate that there are other manners to
electronically execute a paired
facilitation order. Similarly, the only
way for a FLEX paired order to be
executed electronically is via the
Exchange’s CFLEX system. As such, the
Exchange proposes to amend the
statement at the end of Footnote 11 to
read: ‘‘For facilitation orders (other than
SPX, SPXpm, SRO, VIX or other
volatility indexes, OEX or XEO)
executed in open outcry, or
electronically via AIM or as a QCC or
CFLEX transaction, CBOE will assess no
Clearing Trading Permit Holder
Proprietary transaction fees.
‘‘Facilitation orders’’ for this purpose to
be defined as any order in which a
Clearing Trading Permit Holder (F)
origin code or Non-Trading Permit
Holder Affiliate (‘‘L’’ origin code) is
contra to any other origin code,
provided the same executing broker and
clearing firm are on both sides of the
transaction (for open outcry) or both
sides of a paired order (for orders
executed electronically).’’
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed
rule change is consistent with the Act
and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to the Exchange
and, in particular, the requirements of
Section 6(b) of the Act.6 Specifically,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) 7 requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged
in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the Section 6(b)(5) 8 requirement that
the rules of an exchange not be designed
to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The Exchange also believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,9 which
requires that Exchange rules provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges among its
Trading Permit Holders and other
persons using its facilities.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed change regarding CAS Servers
is reasonable because it will not cause
6 15
5 See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71295
(January 14, 2014), 79 FR 3443 (January 21, 2014)
(SR–CBOE–2013–129).
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
18105
7 15
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
8 Id.
9 15
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
31MRN1
18106
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
any TPHs to be assessed a greater fee
than they currently are, and will allow
some TPHs to pay lower fees by
avoiding having to purchase an extra
CAS Server. The Exchange believes that
this change is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it will apply to
all TPHs equally. The reason that a TPH
that has more Trading Permits is
provided more CAS Servers is to better
distribute and manage bandwidth
capacity (as each Trading Permit affords
a TPH more bandwidth) in order to
ensure better CAS Server performance.
The Exchange believes that the
change to the calculation of the volume
thresholds for the Liquidity Provider
Sliding Scale is reasonable because the
current calculation does not account for
products traded solely on CBOE (except
the Excluded Products), but it does
include volume from multiply-listed
options that may not be traded on
CBOE. Because the Liquidity Provider
Sliding Scale provides for transaction
fees for transactions that occur on
CBOE, the Exchange believes that it is
reasonable and makes sense to include
towards the volume thresholds
transaction volume that occurs on CBOE
(even if it is in products traded only on
CBOE) and not include towards the
volume thresholds transaction volume
in products that may not be listed on
CBOE. The Exchange believes that this
change is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it will apply to
all market participants who qualify for
the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale.
The Exchange believes that it is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to offer the Liquidity
Provider Sliding Scale to Market-Makers
only because Market-Makers take on
obligations, such as quoting obligations,
that other market participants do not
have.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed changes to clarify the Fees
Schedule will serve to eliminate
potential confusion regarding the fee
programs described. This, in turn, will
remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in
general, protect investors and the public
interest.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
CBOE does not believe that the
proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. CBOE does
not believe that the proposed rule
change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:10 Mar 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed changes apply to all CBOE
market participants equally. To the
extent that the Liquidity Provider
Sliding Scale is offered only to MarketMakers, the Exchange believes that this
does not impose a burden on
intramarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act because
Market-Makers take on obligations, such
as quoting obligations, that other market
participants do not have. CBOE does not
believe that the proposed rule change
will impose any burden on intermarket
competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because the
proposed changes only apply to CBOE.
Further, many of the proposed changes
are being made not for competitive
purposes, but in order to clarify the Fees
Schedule. To the extent that the
proposed changes may make CBOE a
more attractive marketplace for market
participants at other exchanges, such
market participants may elect to become
CBOE market participants.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor
received comments on the proposed
rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
of the Act 10 and paragraph (f) of Rule
19b–4 11 thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or
disapproved.
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:
10 15
11 17
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f).
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
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–
CBOE–2014–023 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2014–023. 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.shtmlv). 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 on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
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–CBOE–
2014–023 and should be submitted on
or before April 21, 2014.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.12
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–07054 Filed 3–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
12 17
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
31MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 61 (Monday, March 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18104-18106]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07054]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-71789; File No. SR-CBOE-2014-023]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule
March 25, 2014.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 12, 2014, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') 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. 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
The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site (https://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's
Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule, specifically
regarding the CBOE Command Connectivity Charges. Currently, for every
15 Trading Permits that a Trading Permit Holder (``TPH'') that access
CBOE Command via CMI holds, that TPH receives one CAS Server (plus one
total backup CAS Server regardless of the number of Trading Permits
that the TPH holds). This would mean that a TPH who had, say, 29
Trading Permits would only receive one CAS Server (plus the backup).
The Exchange proposes to instead add a chart listing the amounts of
Trading Permits and corresponding CAS Servers: \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Corresponding to this change, the Exchange proposes to
delete from the ``Notes'' section regarding this fee the language
``For every 15 Trading Permits that a TPH that accesses CBOE Command
via CMI holds, that TPH receives one CAS Server (plus one total
backup CAS Server regardless of the number of Trading Permits that
the TPH holds).'' That language will be replaced with the statement:
``TPHs will receive CAS Servers based on the number of trading
permits a TPH holds.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total CAS
Trading Permits CAS Servers Servers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-15............................... 1 + 1 backup.......... 2
16-30.............................. 2 + 1 backup.......... 3
31-45.............................. 3 + 1 backup.......... 4
46-60.............................. 4 + 1 backup.......... 5
61-75.............................. 5 + 1 backup.......... 6
76-90.............................. 6 + 1 backup.......... 7
91+................................ 7 + 1 backup.......... 8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The effect of this change would be to increase the number of CAS
Servers that many TPHs receive (for example, a TPH that has 29 permits
would now receive two CAS Servers (plus a backup) before having to pay
for an extra CAS Server (which costs $10,000 per month), so TPHs may be
able to save $10,000.
The Exchange also proposes to change its calculation of the volume
thresholds for its Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale, which provides for
reduced transaction fees for Market-Makers that reach certain volume
thresholds.\4\ Currently, the volume thresholds are based on total
national Market-Maker multiply-listed options volume. However, this
does not account for products traded solely on
[[Page 18105]]
CBOE (except the Excluded Products), but it does include volume from
multiply-listed options that may not be traded on CBOE. Because the
Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale provides for transaction fees for
transactions that occur on CBOE, the Exchange believes that it makes
sense to include towards the volume thresholds transaction volume that
occurs on CBOE (even if it is in products traded only on CBOE) and not
include towards the volume thresholds transaction volume in products
that may not be listed on CBOE. As such, the Exchange proposes to state
that, for the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale, volume thresholds are
based on total national Market-Maker volume of any options classes
listed on CBOE with traded volume on CBOE during the calendar month.
This will continue to exclude the Excluded Products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale applies in all products
except mini-options, SPX, SPXpm, SRO, VIX or other VOLATILITY
INDEXES, OEX or XEO (the ``Excluded Products''). For more
information regarding the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale, see the
CBOE Fees Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange always strives for clarity in its rules and Fees
Schedule, so that market participants may best understand how rules and
fees apply. As such, the Exchange proposes a number of changes to
clarify its Fees Schedule.
Footnote 22 of the Exchange Fees Schedule states that ``For all
non-facilitation business executed in AIM or open outcry, or as a QCC
or FLEX transaction, transaction fees for Clearing Trading Permit
Holder Proprietary and/or their Non-Trading Permit Holder Affiliates
(as defined in footnote 11) in all products except SPX, SPXpm, VIX or
other volatility indexes, OEX or XEO, in the aggregate, are capped at
$75,000 per month per Clearing Trading Permit Holder.'' The Exchange
has never considered surcharges to be ``transaction fees'', as
surcharges are assessed on top of transaction fees and often are
adopted to offset the costs of licensing and/or developing specific
Exchange products and systems. Additionally, surcharges appear
separately on the invoices the Exchange provides to TPHs. As such, the
Exchange proposes to explicitly state in Footnote 22 that ``Surcharge
fees do not count towards the cap.''
The Exchange also proposes to clarify its CBOE Proprietary Products
Sliding Scale (the ``Sliding Scale''), pursuant to which Clearing
Trading Permit Holder Proprietary transaction fees and transaction fees
for Non-Trading Permit Holder Affiliates in OEX, XEO, SPX, SPXpm, VIX
and VOLATILITY INDEXES in a month will be reduced provided a Clearing
Trading Permit Holder reaches certain ADV thresholds in multiply-listed
options on the Exchange in a month. Effective January 2, 2014, the
Exchange amended the Sliding Scale to change the different tier
thresholds from nominal contracts per month thresholds to relative
contracts per month thresholds.\5\ Indeed, the Exchange added to the
``Notes'' section of the Sliding Scale table the following language:
``Transaction fees in OEX, XEO, SPX, SPXpm, VIX and VOLATILITY INDEXES
will be reduced based on reaching the percentage thresholds in OEX,
XEO, SPX, SPXpm, VIX and VOLATILITY INDEXES listed in the table.''
However, the Exchange feels that more clarity can be achieved by more
accurately describing what those percentages are of (the denominator in
the percentage calculation). As such, the Exchange proposes to add the
following language: ``Percentages are calculated by accounting for all
volume in OEX, XEO, SPX, SPXpm, VIX and VOLATILITY INDEXES executed
with an ``F'' or ``L'' Origin Code.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71295 (January 14,
2014), 79 FR 3443 (January 21, 2014) (SR-CBOE-2013-129).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes to clarify a statement in Footnote 11.
The end of Footnote 11 reads: ``For facilitation orders (other than
SPX, SPXpm, SRO, VIX or other volatility indexes, OEX or XEO)
(``facilitation orders'' for this purpose to be defined as any paired
order in which a Clearing Trading Permit Holder (F) origin code or Non-
Trading Permit Holder Affiliate (``L'' origin code) is contra to any
other origin code, provided the same executing broker and clearing firm
are on both sides of the order) executed electronically (including in
AIM), open outcry, or as a QCC or FLEX transaction, CBOE will assess no
Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary transaction fees.'' However,
there are a number of clarifications necessary to that statement.
First, there is no way, systematically, for orders that are executed in
open outcry to be identified as being ``paired''. The only way to
identify an open outcry order as being ``facilitated'' is for it to
have the same executing broker and clearing firm on both sides.
However, it is inaccurate to say ``both sides of the order'' when
referring to open outcry, as, since they are not paired, they come in
separately and therefore the word ``order'' should be replaced with the
word ``transaction''.
Further, the only way for a non-FLEX, non-QCC paired facilitation
order to be executed electronically is via AIM. The current language
could be read to indicate that there are other manners to
electronically execute a paired facilitation order. Similarly, the only
way for a FLEX paired order to be executed electronically is via the
Exchange's CFLEX system. As such, the Exchange proposes to amend the
statement at the end of Footnote 11 to read: ``For facilitation orders
(other than SPX, SPXpm, SRO, VIX or other volatility indexes, OEX or
XEO) executed in open outcry, or electronically via AIM or as a QCC or
CFLEX transaction, CBOE will assess no Clearing Trading Permit Holder
Proprietary transaction fees. ``Facilitation orders'' for this purpose
to be defined as any order in which a Clearing Trading Permit Holder
(F) origin code or Non-Trading Permit Holder Affiliate (``L'' origin
code) is contra to any other origin code, provided the same executing
broker and clearing firm are on both sides of the transaction (for open
outcry) or both sides of a paired order (for orders executed
electronically).''
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\6\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \7\ requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\9\
which requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation
of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its Trading Permit
Holders and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\8\ Id.
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed change regarding CAS
Servers is reasonable because it will not cause
[[Page 18106]]
any TPHs to be assessed a greater fee than they currently are, and will
allow some TPHs to pay lower fees by avoiding having to purchase an
extra CAS Server. The Exchange believes that this change is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because it will apply to all TPHs
equally. The reason that a TPH that has more Trading Permits is
provided more CAS Servers is to better distribute and manage bandwidth
capacity (as each Trading Permit affords a TPH more bandwidth) in order
to ensure better CAS Server performance.
The Exchange believes that the change to the calculation of the
volume thresholds for the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale is
reasonable because the current calculation does not account for
products traded solely on CBOE (except the Excluded Products), but it
does include volume from multiply-listed options that may not be traded
on CBOE. Because the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale provides for
transaction fees for transactions that occur on CBOE, the Exchange
believes that it is reasonable and makes sense to include towards the
volume thresholds transaction volume that occurs on CBOE (even if it is
in products traded only on CBOE) and not include towards the volume
thresholds transaction volume in products that may not be listed on
CBOE. The Exchange believes that this change is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it will apply to all market
participants who qualify for the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale. The
Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
to offer the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale to Market-Makers only
because Market-Makers take on obligations, such as quoting obligations,
that other market participants do not have.
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to clarify the Fees
Schedule will serve to eliminate potential confusion regarding the fee
programs described. This, in turn, will remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. CBOE does not believe that the
proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act because the proposed changes apply to all CBOE market
participants equally. To the extent that the Liquidity Provider Sliding
Scale is offered only to Market-Makers, the Exchange believes that this
does not impose a burden on intramarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because Market-Makers take on obligations, such as quoting obligations,
that other market participants do not have. CBOE does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intermarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because the proposed changes only apply to CBOE.
Further, many of the proposed changes are being made not for
competitive purposes, but in order to clarify the Fees Schedule. To the
extent that the proposed changes may make CBOE a more attractive
marketplace for market participants at other exchanges, such market
participants may elect to become CBOE market participants.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \11\
thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2014-023 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2014-023. 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.shtmlv). 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 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the 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-CBOE-2014-023 and should be
submitted on or before April 21, 2014.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-07054 Filed 3-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P