Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule, 26124-26127 [2015-10505]
Download as PDF
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
26124
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 87 / Wednesday, May 6, 2015 / Notices
securities as defined in the 1940 Act, or,
in the case of a new Subadvised Series
whose public shareholders purchase
shares on the basis of a prospectus
containing the disclosure contemplated
by condition 2 below, by the sole initial
shareholder before offering the
Subadvised Series’ shares to the public.
2. The prospectus for each
Subadvised Series will disclose the
existence, substance, and effect of any
order granted pursuant to the
application. Each Subadvised Series
will hold itself out to the public as
employing the multi-manager structure
described in the application. Each
prospectus will prominently disclose
that the Adviser has the ultimate
responsibility, subject to oversight by
the Board, to oversee the Sub-Advisers
and recommend their hiring,
termination and replacement.
3. The Adviser will provide general
management services to a Subadvised
Series, including overall supervisory
responsibility for the general
management and investment of the
Subadvised Series’ assets. Subject to
review and approval of the Board, the
Adviser will (a) set a Subadvised Series’
overall investment strategies, (b)
evaluate, select, and recommend SubAdvisers to manage all or a portion of
a Subadvised Series’ assets, and (c)
implement procedures reasonably
designed to ensure that Sub-Advisers
comply with a Subadvised Series’
investment objective, policies and
restrictions. Subject to review by the
Board, the Adviser will (a) when
appropriate, allocate and reallocate a
Subadvised Series’ assets among
multiple Sub-Advisers; and (b) monitor
and evaluate the performance of SubAdvisers.
4. A Subadvised Series will not make
any Ineligible Sub-Adviser Changes
without such agreement, including the
compensation to be paid thereunder,
being approved by the shareholders of
the applicable Subadvised Series.
5. Subadvised Series will inform
shareholders of the hiring of a new SubAdviser within 90 days after the hiring
of the new Sub-Adviser pursuant to the
Modified Notice and Access Procedures.
6. At all times, at least a majority of
the Board will be Independent Board
Members, and the selection and
nomination of new or additional
Independent Board Members will be
placed within the discretion of the thenexisting Independent Board Members.
7. Independent Legal Counsel, as
defined in Rule 0–1(a)(6) under the 1940
Act, will be engaged to represent the
Independent Board Members. The
selection of such counsel will be within
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:43 May 05, 2015
Jkt 235001
the discretion of the then- existing
Independent Board Members.
8. The Adviser will provide the
Board, no less frequently than quarterly,
with information about the profitability
of the Adviser on a per Subadvised
Series basis. The information will reflect
the impact on profitability of the hiring
or termination of any sub-adviser during
the applicable quarter.
9. Whenever a sub-adviser is hired or
terminated, the Adviser will provide the
Board with information showing the
expected impact on the profitability of
the Adviser.
10. Whenever a sub-adviser change is
proposed for a Subadvised Series with
an Affiliated Sub-Advisor, the Board,
including a majority of the Independent
Board Members, will make a separate
finding, reflected in the Board minutes,
that such change is in the best interests
of the Subadvised Series and its
shareholders, and does not involve a
conflict of interest from which the
Advisor or the Affiliated Sub-Advisor
derives an inappropriate advantage.
11. No trustee or officer of the Trust
or a Subadvised Series, or partner,
director, manager or officer of the
Adviser, will own directly or indirectly
(other than through a pooled investment
vehicle that is not controlled by such
person), any interest in a Sub-Adviser,
except for (a) ownership of interests in
the Adviser or any entity that controls,
is controlled by, or is under common
control with the Adviser; or (b)
ownership of less than 1% of the
outstanding securities of any class of
equity or debt of a publicly traded
company that is either a Sub-Adviser or
an entity that controls, is controlled by,
or is under common control with a SubAdviser.
12. Each Subadvised Series will
disclose the Aggregate Fee Disclosure in
its registration statement.
13. Any new Sub-Advisory
Agreement or any amendment to a
Subadvised Series’ existing Investment
Management Agreement or SubAdvisory Agreement that directly or
indirectly results in an increase in the
aggregate advisory fee rate payable by
the Subadvised Series will be submitted
to the Subadvised Series’ shareholders
for approval.
14. In the event the Commission
adopts a rule under the Act providing
substantially similar relief to that
requested in the application, the
requested order will expire on the
effective date of that rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00130
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
For the Commission, by the Division of
Investment Management, under delegated
authority.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–10511 Filed 5–5–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–74854; File No. SR–CBOE–
2015–041]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the Fees
Schedule
April 30, 2015.
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 April 20,
2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (‘‘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
1 15
2 17
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 87 / Wednesday, May 6, 2015 / Notices
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
On, April 8 2015, the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the
‘‘Commission’’) approved a proposed
rule change that would amend CBOE
rules to permit the listing and trading of
options that overlie the MSCI EAFE
Index (‘‘MXEA options’’) and the MSCI
Emerging Markets Index (‘‘MXEF
options’’).3 As such, the Exchange
proposes to establish fees for MXEA and
MXEF, effective April 21, 2015.
First, the Exchange proposes to
establish transaction fees for MXEA and
MXEF. Under the proposed fees
structure, Customers (‘‘C’’ origin code)
will be assessed no transaction fee for
MXEA and MXEF transactions. The
absence of a Customer transaction fee
for MXEA and MXEF options will
provide greater incentives for Customers
to trade MXEA and MXEF. The
Exchange notes that currently another
proprietary index option, XSP, is also
not assessed a fee for Customer
transactions.4
Next, the Exchange proposes to assess
Clearing Trading Permit Holder
proprietary (‘‘F’’ origin code) and NonTrading Permit Holder Affiliate (‘‘L’’
origin code) MXEA and MXEF
transactions $0.20 per contract for
manual and Automated Improvement
Mechanism (‘‘AIM’’) Agency/Primary
transactions, $0.35 per contract for
electronic transactions, $0.05 per
contract for AIM Contra transactions
and $0.25 per contract for Flex Hybrid
Trading Systems (‘‘CFLEX’’) AIM
Response transactions. The Exchange
also proposes to count MXEA and
MXEF volume towards the Clearing
Trading Permit Holder Fee Cap (‘‘Fee
Cap’’). This will help these market
participants to reach this cap on their
fees. Additionally, the Exchange
recognizes that Clearing Trading Permit
Holders can be an important source of
liquidity when they facilitate their own
customers’ trading activity and, as such,
the Exchange proposes to apply the
waiver of Clearing Trading Permit
Holder Proprietary transaction fees for
facilitation orders executed via CFLEX,
in open outcry or electronically via
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74681
(April 8, 2015), 80 FR 71 [sic] (April 14, 2015) (SR–
CBOE–2015–023).
4 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate
Table—All Index Products Excluding Underlying
Symbol List A.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:43 May 05, 2015
Jkt 235001
AIM. The Exchange notes that the
proposed transaction fee amounts for
Clearing Trading Permit Holder
proprietary and Non-Trading Permit
Holder Affiliate transactions are the
same for Clearing Trading Permit Holder
proprietary and Non-Trading Permit
Holder Affiliate transactions in all other
index products except for Underlying
Symbol List A.5
Currently, Market-Maker transactions
in all products except for those listed in
Underlying Symbol List A are subject to
the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale,
which provides for reduced transaction
fees for Market-Makers that reach
certain volume thresholds in all
underlying symbols excluding
Underlying Symbol List A and minioptions. Similarly, the Exchange
proposes to subject all Market-Maker
MXEA and MXEF transactions to the
Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale.
The Exchange next proposes to
establish transaction fees for BrokerDealers (‘‘B’’), Non-Trading Permit
Holder Market-Makers (‘‘N’’),
Professionals/Voluntary Professionals
(‘‘W’’) and Joint Back-Offices (‘‘JBOs’’)
(‘‘J’’). Specifically, the Exchange
proposes to assess these market
participants $0.25 per contract for
manual transactions, $0.65 per contract
for non-AIM electronic transactions,
$0.20 per contract for AIM Agency/
Primary transactions, and $0.05 per
contract for AIM Contra transactions.
Additionally for MXEA and MXEF
transactions, the Exchange is proposing
to assess Broker-Dealers and NonTrading Permit Holder Market Makers
$0.25 per contract for CFLEX AIM
Response transactions and Professional/
Voluntary Professionals and JBOs $0.30
per contract for CFLEX AIM Response
transactions. The Exchange notes that
the proposed MXEA and MXEF
transaction fees for these market
participants are also the same amounts
assessed for the same market
participants for other index options
other than those in Underlying Symbol
List A.6
The Exchange also proposes to assess
an Index License Surcharge
(‘‘Surcharge’’) for MXEA and MXEF of
$0.10 per contract for all non-customer
orders. The Exchange proposes to adopt
the Index License Surcharge for these
products in order to recoup some of the
costs associated with the license for
5 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate
Table—All Index Products Excluding Underlying
Symbol List A. As of April 1, 2015, the following
products are included in Underlying Symbol List A:
OEX, XEO, RUT, SPX (including SPXw), SPXpm,
SRO, VIX, VXST, VOLATILITY INDEXES and
binary options.
6 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26125
MXEA and MXEF options. Additionally,
the Exchange proposes to adopt a
CFLEX Surcharge Fee of $0.10 per
contract for all MXEA and MXEF orders
executed electronically on CFLEX,
capped at $250 per trade (i.e., first 2,500
contracts per trade). The CFLEX
Surcharge Fee assists the Exchange in
recouping the cost of developing and
maintaining the CFLEX system. The
Exchange notes that the CFLEX
Surcharge Fee (and $250 cap) also
applies to other proprietary index
options, including products in
Underlying Symbol List A, as well as
DJX and XSP.7 The Exchange also notes
that the Complex Order Book (‘‘COB’’)
Taker Surcharge will also apply to
MXEA and MXEF, as it does for all
products other than those in Underlying
Symbol list A and mini-options.8
The Exchange next proposes to count
MXEA and MXEF options towards the
average daily volume thresholds for the
CBOE Proprietary Product Sliding Scale.
The CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding
Scale provides that Clearing Trading
Permit Holder Proprietary transaction
fees and transaction fees for NonClearing Trading Permit Holder
Affiliates in Underlying Symbol List A 9
are reduced provided a Clearing Trading
Permit Holder (‘‘Clearing TPH’’) reaches
certain average daily volume (‘‘ADV’’)
thresholds in all underlying symbols
excluding Underlying Symbol List A
and mini-options on the Exchange in a
month. The Exchange notes that other
proprietary index products such as DJX
and XSP are also included towards the
qualification thresholds of the CBOE
Proprietary Products Sliding Scale.
Finally, like other proprietary index
products, the Exchange proposes to
except MXEA and MXEF from the
Volume Incentive Program, 10 the
Marketing Fee, 11 and eligibility for
payments under the Order Router
Subsidy (ORS) and Complex Order
Router Subsidy (CORS) Programs 12.
Additionally, it will be excluded from
the calculation of qualifying volume for
7 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate
Table—All Index Products Excluding Underlying
Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee [sic] and
Specified Proprietary Index Options Rate Table—
Underlying Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee.
8 See CBOE Fees Schedule, COB Taker Surcharge,
Footnote 35.
9 SROs are currently excluded from the CBOE
Proprietary Products Sliding Scale. See Exchange
Fees Schedule, CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding
Scale.
10 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive
Program.
11 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Marketing Fee,
Footnote 6.
12 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Order Router
Subsidy Program and Complex Order Subsidy
Program, Footnotes 29 and 30.
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
26126
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 87 / Wednesday, May 6, 2015 / Notices
rebates for Floor Broker Trading Permit
Holder Trading Permit Fees.13
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed
rule change is consistent with the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to the Exchange
and, in particular, the requirements of
Section 6(b) of the Act.14 Specifically,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) 15 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
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,16 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.
Particularly, the Exchange believes it
is reasonable to charge different fee
amounts to different user types in the
manner proposed because the proposed
fees are consistent with the price
differentiation that exists today for other
index products. The Exchange also
believes that the proposed fee amounts
for MXEA and MXEF orders are
reasonable because the proposed fee
amounts are within the range of
amounts assessed for the Exchange’s
other index products, excluding
Underlying Symbol List A.17
The Exchange believes that it is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess lower fees to
Customers as compared to other market
participants because Customer order
flow enhances liquidity on the
Exchange for the benefit of all market
participants. Specifically, customer
liquidity benefits all market participants
by providing more trading
opportunities, which attracts MarketMakers. An increase in the activity of
these market participants in turn
13 See
CBOE Fees Schedule, Footnote 25.
14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
17 See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Fees Schedule,
Index Options Rate Table—All Index Products
Excluding Underlying Symbol List A.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:43 May 05, 2015
Jkt 235001
facilitates tighter spreads, which may
cause an additional corresponding
increase in order flow from other market
participants. The fees offered to
customers are intended to attract more
customer trading volume to the
Exchange. Moreover, the options
industry has a long history of providing
preferential pricing to Customers, and
the Exchange’s current Fees Schedule
currently does so in many places, as do
the fees structures of many other
exchanges. Finally, all fee amounts
listed as applying to Customers will be
applied equally to all Customers
(meaning that all Customers will be
assessed the same amount).
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,
which other market participants do not
have. Further, the lower fees offered to
Market-Makers are intended to incent
Market-Makers to quote and trade more
on the Exchange, thereby providing
more trading opportunities for all
market participants.
Similarly, it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to assess lower
fees to Clearing Trading Permit Holder
Proprietary orders than those of other
market participants (except Customers
and Market-Makers) because Clearing
Trading Permit Holders also have a
number of obligations (such as
membership with the Options Clearing
Corporation), significant regulatory
burdens, and financial obligations, that
other market participants do not need to
take on. It should also be noted that all
fee amounts described herein are
intended to attract greater order flow to
the Exchange in MXEA and MXEF,
which should therefore serve to benefit
all Exchange market participants. The
Exchange also notes that the MXEA and
MXEF fee amounts for each separate
type of market participant will be
assessed equally to all such market
participants (i.e. all Broker-Dealer
orders will be assessed the same
amount, all Joint Back-Office orders will
be assessed the same amount, etc.).
The Exchange believes that assessing
an Index License Surcharge Fee of $0.10
per contract to MXEA and MXEF
transactions is reasonable because the
Surcharge helps recoup some of the
costs associated with the license for
MXEA and MXEF options. Additionally,
the Exchange notes that the Surcharge
amount is the same as, and in some
cases lower than, the amount assessed
as an Index License Surcharge to other
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
index products.18 The proposed
Surcharge is also equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the
amount will be assessed to all market
participants to whom the Surcharge
applies. Not applying the MXEA and
MXEF Index License Surcharge Fee to
Customer orders is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because this is
designed to attract Customer MXEA and
MXEF orders, which increases liquidity
and provides greater trading
opportunities to all market participants.
Similarly, the Exchange believes
assessing a CFLEX Surcharge Fee of
$0.10 per contract for all MXEA and
MXEF orders executed electronically on
CFLEX and capping it at $250 (i.e., first
2,500 contracts per trade) is reasonable
because it is the same amount currently
charged to other proprietary index
products for the same transactions.19
The proposed Surcharge is also
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the amount will
be assessed to all market participants to
whom the CFLEX Surcharge applies.
Additionally, the Exchange believes
that the proposal to count MXEA and
MXEF fees towards the Fee Cap is
reasonable because it will help Clearing
Trading Permit Holders to reach this cap
on their fees. The Exchange believes this
is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory MXEA and MXEF fees
will count towards the Fee Cap in the
same manner that transaction fees for all
other products excluding Underlying
Symbol List A (except for binary
options) count towards the Fee Cap.
The Exchange believes it’s reasonable
to apply the waiver of Clearing Trading
Permit Holder Proprietary transaction
fees for facilitation orders executed via
CFLEX, in open outcry or electronically
via AIM for MXEA and MXEF because
it will exempt such orders from being
assessed fees. The Exchange believes
that this is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the waiver also
applies to other products, including
other proprietary index products (e.g.,
DJX and XSP). Further, the Exchange
recognizes that Clearing Trading Permit
Holders can be an important source of
liquidity when they facilitate their own
customers’ trading activity. Such trades
add transparency and promote price
discovery to the benefit of all market
participants. Moreover, the exemption
18 See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Fees Schedule,
Index Options Rate Table—All Index Products
Excluding Underlying Symbol List A, Surcharge
Fee Index License.
19 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate
Table—All Index Products Excluding Underlying
Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee and Specified
Proprietary Index Options Rate Table—Underlying
Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee.
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
06MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 87 / Wednesday, May 6, 2015 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
from fees for MXEA and MXEF
facilitation orders executed in AIM,
open outcry, or as a CFLEX transaction
will apply to all such orders.
The Exchange believes it’s reasonable
to count MXEA and MXEF volume
towards the average daily volume
thresholds for the CBOE Proprietary
Product Sliding Scale because other
proprietary index products such as DJX
and XSP are also included towards the
qualification thresholds of the CBOE
Proprietary Products Sliding Scale.20
The Exchange believes the proposed
inclusion of MXEA and MXEF in the
qualifying volume is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it will
apply to all Clearing Trading Permit
Holder Proprietary MXEA and MXEF
orders
Finally, excepting MXEA and MXEF
from the Marketing Fee, VIP, and the
ORS and CORS Programs is reasonable
because other proprietary index
products (e.g., DJX and XSP) are also
excepted from these fees and
programs.21 It seems equitable to except
MXEA and MXEF from items on the
Fees Schedule from which other
proprietary index products are also
excepted. Similarly, the Exchange
believes it’s reasonable to exclude
MXEA and MXEF from the calculation
of the qualifying volume for the Floor
Broker Trading Permit Fees rebate
because other proprietary index
products such as DJX and XSP are also
excluded.22 The Exchange also believes
the proposed exclusion of MXEA and
MXEF from the qualifying calculation is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the exclusion
will apply to all MXEA and MXEF
orders.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule changes will impose
any burden on competition that are not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. The
Exchange 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, while different fees are
assessed to different market participants
in some circumstances, these different
market participants have different
obligations and different circumstances
20 See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Proprietary
Products Sliding Scale.
21 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive
Program, Marketing Fee, Footnote 6 and Order
Router Subsidy Program and Complex Order
Subsidy Program, Footnotes 29 and 30.
22 See CBOE Fees Schedule, Footnote 25.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:43 May 05, 2015
Jkt 235001
as discussed above. For example,
Market-Makers have quoting obligations
that other market participants do not
have.
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule changes will impose
any burden on intermarket competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because MXEA and MXEF will be
exclusively listed on CBOE. To the
extent that the proposed changes make
CBOE a more attractive marketplace for
market participants at other exchanges,
such market participants are welcome 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 23 and paragraph (f) of Rule
19b–4 24 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:
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–2015–041 on the subject line.
Paper comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
23 15
24 17
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f).
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE-2015–041. 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–CBOE2015–041 and should be submitted on
or before May 27, 2015.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.25
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–10505 Filed 5–5–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–74853; File No. SR–OCC–
2015–006]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The
Options Clearing Corporation; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change
Concerning the Provision of Clearance
and Settlement Services for Energy
Futures and Options on Energy
Futures
April 30, 2015.
On March 2, 2015, The Options
Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) filed with
25 17
Sfmt 4703
26127
E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
06MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26124-26127]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10505]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-74854; File No. SR-CBOE-2015-041]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule
April 30, 2015.
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 April 20, 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``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
[[Page 26125]]
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
On, April 8 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') approved a proposed rule change that would amend CBOE
rules to permit the listing and trading of options that overlie the
MSCI EAFE Index (``MXEA options'') and the MSCI Emerging Markets Index
(``MXEF options'').\3\ As such, the Exchange proposes to establish fees
for MXEA and MXEF, effective April 21, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74681 (April 8,
2015), 80 FR 71 [sic] (April 14, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, the Exchange proposes to establish transaction fees for MXEA
and MXEF. Under the proposed fees structure, Customers (``C'' origin
code) will be assessed no transaction fee for MXEA and MXEF
transactions. The absence of a Customer transaction fee for MXEA and
MXEF options will provide greater incentives for Customers to trade
MXEA and MXEF. The Exchange notes that currently another proprietary
index option, XSP, is also not assessed a fee for Customer
transactions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate Table--All Index
Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, the Exchange proposes to assess Clearing Trading Permit
Holder proprietary (``F'' origin code) and Non-Trading Permit Holder
Affiliate (``L'' origin code) MXEA and MXEF transactions $0.20 per
contract for manual and Automated Improvement Mechanism (``AIM'')
Agency/Primary transactions, $0.35 per contract for electronic
transactions, $0.05 per contract for AIM Contra transactions and $0.25
per contract for Flex Hybrid Trading Systems (``CFLEX'') AIM Response
transactions. The Exchange also proposes to count MXEA and MXEF volume
towards the Clearing Trading Permit Holder Fee Cap (``Fee Cap''). This
will help these market participants to reach this cap on their fees.
Additionally, the Exchange recognizes that Clearing Trading Permit
Holders can be an important source of liquidity when they facilitate
their own customers' trading activity and, as such, the Exchange
proposes to apply the waiver of Clearing Trading Permit Holder
Proprietary transaction fees for facilitation orders executed via
CFLEX, in open outcry or electronically via AIM. The Exchange notes
that the proposed transaction fee amounts for Clearing Trading Permit
Holder proprietary and Non-Trading Permit Holder Affiliate transactions
are the same for Clearing Trading Permit Holder proprietary and Non-
Trading Permit Holder Affiliate transactions in all other index
products except for Underlying Symbol List A.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate Table--All Index
Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A. As of April 1, 2015,
the following products are included in Underlying Symbol List A:
OEX, XEO, RUT, SPX (including SPXw), SPXpm, SRO, VIX, VXST,
VOLATILITY INDEXES and binary options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, Market-Maker transactions in all products except for
those listed in Underlying Symbol List A are subject to the Liquidity
Provider Sliding Scale, which provides for reduced transaction fees for
Market-Makers that reach certain volume thresholds in all underlying
symbols excluding Underlying Symbol List A and mini-options. Similarly,
the Exchange proposes to subject all Market-Maker MXEA and MXEF
transactions to the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale.
The Exchange next proposes to establish transaction fees for
Broker-Dealers (``B''), Non-Trading Permit Holder Market-Makers
(``N''), Professionals/Voluntary Professionals (``W'') and Joint Back-
Offices (``JBOs'') (``J''). Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
assess these market participants $0.25 per contract for manual
transactions, $0.65 per contract for non-AIM electronic transactions,
$0.20 per contract for AIM Agency/Primary transactions, and $0.05 per
contract for AIM Contra transactions. Additionally for MXEA and MXEF
transactions, the Exchange is proposing to assess Broker-Dealers and
Non-Trading Permit Holder Market Makers $0.25 per contract for CFLEX
AIM Response transactions and Professional/Voluntary Professionals and
JBOs $0.30 per contract for CFLEX AIM Response transactions. The
Exchange notes that the proposed MXEA and MXEF transaction fees for
these market participants are also the same amounts assessed for the
same market participants for other index options other than those in
Underlying Symbol List A.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes to assess an Index License Surcharge
(``Surcharge'') for MXEA and MXEF of $0.10 per contract for all non-
customer orders. The Exchange proposes to adopt the Index License
Surcharge for these products in order to recoup some of the costs
associated with the license for MXEA and MXEF options. Additionally,
the Exchange proposes to adopt a CFLEX Surcharge Fee of $0.10 per
contract for all MXEA and MXEF orders executed electronically on CFLEX,
capped at $250 per trade (i.e., first 2,500 contracts per trade). The
CFLEX Surcharge Fee assists the Exchange in recouping the cost of
developing and maintaining the CFLEX system. The Exchange notes that
the CFLEX Surcharge Fee (and $250 cap) also applies to other
proprietary index options, including products in Underlying Symbol List
A, as well as DJX and XSP.\7\ The Exchange also notes that the Complex
Order Book (``COB'') Taker Surcharge will also apply to MXEA and MXEF,
as it does for all products other than those in Underlying Symbol list
A and mini-options.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate Table--All Index
Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee
[sic] and Specified Proprietary Index Options Rate Table--Underlying
Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee.
\8\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, COB Taker Surcharge, Footnote 35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange next proposes to count MXEA and MXEF options towards
the average daily volume thresholds for the CBOE Proprietary Product
Sliding Scale. The CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding Scale provides
that Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary transaction fees and
transaction fees for Non-Clearing Trading Permit Holder Affiliates in
Underlying Symbol List A \9\ are reduced provided a Clearing Trading
Permit Holder (``Clearing TPH'') reaches certain average daily volume
(``ADV'') thresholds in all underlying symbols excluding Underlying
Symbol List A and mini-options on the Exchange in a month. The Exchange
notes that other proprietary index products such as DJX and XSP are
also included towards the qualification thresholds of the CBOE
Proprietary Products Sliding Scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ SROs are currently excluded from the CBOE Proprietary
Products Sliding Scale. See Exchange Fees Schedule, CBOE Proprietary
Products Sliding Scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, like other proprietary index products, the Exchange
proposes to except MXEA and MXEF from the Volume Incentive Program,
\10\ the Marketing Fee, \11\ and eligibility for payments under the
Order Router Subsidy (ORS) and Complex Order Router Subsidy (CORS)
Programs \12\. Additionally, it will be excluded from the calculation
of qualifying volume for
[[Page 26126]]
rebates for Floor Broker Trading Permit Holder Trading Permit Fees.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive Program.
\11\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Marketing Fee, Footnote 6.
\12\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Order Router Subsidy Program and
Complex Order Subsidy Program, Footnotes 29 and 30.
\13\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Footnote 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\14\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \15\ 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
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\16\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particularly, the Exchange believes it is reasonable to charge
different fee amounts to different user types in the manner proposed
because the proposed fees are consistent with the price differentiation
that exists today for other index products. The Exchange also believes
that the proposed fee amounts for MXEA and MXEF orders are reasonable
because the proposed fee amounts are within the range of amounts
assessed for the Exchange's other index products, excluding Underlying
Symbol List A.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options
Rate Table--All Index Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess lower fees to Customers as compared to other
market participants because Customer order flow enhances liquidity on
the Exchange for the benefit of all market participants. Specifically,
customer liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more
trading opportunities, which attracts Market-Makers. An increase in the
activity of these market participants in turn facilitates tighter
spreads, which may cause an additional corresponding increase in order
flow from other market participants. The fees offered to customers are
intended to attract more customer trading volume to the Exchange.
Moreover, the options industry has a long history of providing
preferential pricing to Customers, and the Exchange's current Fees
Schedule currently does so in many places, as do the fees structures of
many other exchanges. Finally, all fee amounts listed as applying to
Customers will be applied equally to all Customers (meaning that all
Customers will be assessed the same amount).
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, which other market participants do not have. Further, the
lower fees offered to Market-Makers are intended to incent Market-
Makers to quote and trade more on the Exchange, thereby providing more
trading opportunities for all market participants.
Similarly, it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
assess lower fees to Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary orders
than those of other market participants (except Customers and Market-
Makers) because Clearing Trading Permit Holders also have a number of
obligations (such as membership with the Options Clearing Corporation),
significant regulatory burdens, and financial obligations, that other
market participants do not need to take on. It should also be noted
that all fee amounts described herein are intended to attract greater
order flow to the Exchange in MXEA and MXEF, which should therefore
serve to benefit all Exchange market participants. The Exchange also
notes that the MXEA and MXEF fee amounts for each separate type of
market participant will be assessed equally to all such market
participants (i.e. all Broker-Dealer orders will be assessed the same
amount, all Joint Back-Office orders will be assessed the same amount,
etc.).
The Exchange believes that assessing an Index License Surcharge Fee
of $0.10 per contract to MXEA and MXEF transactions is reasonable
because the Surcharge helps recoup some of the costs associated with
the license for MXEA and MXEF options. Additionally, the Exchange notes
that the Surcharge amount is the same as, and in some cases lower than,
the amount assessed as an Index License Surcharge to other index
products.\18\ The proposed Surcharge is also equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the amount will be assessed to all market
participants to whom the Surcharge applies. Not applying the MXEA and
MXEF Index License Surcharge Fee to Customer orders is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory because this is designed to attract
Customer MXEA and MXEF orders, which increases liquidity and provides
greater trading opportunities to all market participants. Similarly,
the Exchange believes assessing a CFLEX Surcharge Fee of $0.10 per
contract for all MXEA and MXEF orders executed electronically on CFLEX
and capping it at $250 (i.e., first 2,500 contracts per trade) is
reasonable because it is the same amount currently charged to other
proprietary index products for the same transactions.\19\ The proposed
Surcharge is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
amount will be assessed to all market participants to whom the CFLEX
Surcharge applies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options
Rate Table--All Index Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A,
Surcharge Fee Index License.
\19\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate Table--All Index
Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee and
Specified Proprietary Index Options Rate Table--Underlying Symbol
List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposal to count MXEA
and MXEF fees towards the Fee Cap is reasonable because it will help
Clearing Trading Permit Holders to reach this cap on their fees. The
Exchange believes this is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
MXEA and MXEF fees will count towards the Fee Cap in the same manner
that transaction fees for all other products excluding Underlying
Symbol List A (except for binary options) count towards the Fee Cap.
The Exchange believes it's reasonable to apply the waiver of
Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary transaction fees for
facilitation orders executed via CFLEX, in open outcry or
electronically via AIM for MXEA and MXEF because it will exempt such
orders from being assessed fees. The Exchange believes that this is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the waiver also
applies to other products, including other proprietary index products
(e.g., DJX and XSP). Further, the Exchange recognizes that Clearing
Trading Permit Holders can be an important source of liquidity when
they facilitate their own customers' trading activity. Such trades add
transparency and promote price discovery to the benefit of all market
participants. Moreover, the exemption
[[Page 26127]]
from fees for MXEA and MXEF facilitation orders executed in AIM, open
outcry, or as a CFLEX transaction will apply to all such orders.
The Exchange believes it's reasonable to count MXEA and MXEF volume
towards the average daily volume thresholds for the CBOE Proprietary
Product Sliding Scale because other proprietary index products such as
DJX and XSP are also included towards the qualification thresholds of
the CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding Scale.\20\ The Exchange believes
the proposed inclusion of MXEA and MXEF in the qualifying volume is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it will apply to all
Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary MXEA and MXEF orders
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding
Scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, excepting MXEA and MXEF from the Marketing Fee, VIP, and
the ORS and CORS Programs is reasonable because other proprietary index
products (e.g., DJX and XSP) are also excepted from these fees and
programs.\21\ It seems equitable to except MXEA and MXEF from items on
the Fees Schedule from which other proprietary index products are also
excepted. Similarly, the Exchange believes it's reasonable to exclude
MXEA and MXEF from the calculation of the qualifying volume for the
Floor Broker Trading Permit Fees rebate because other proprietary index
products such as DJX and XSP are also excluded.\22\ The Exchange also
believes the proposed exclusion of MXEA and MXEF from the qualifying
calculation is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
exclusion will apply to all MXEA and MXEF orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive Program, Marketing
Fee, Footnote 6 and Order Router Subsidy Program and Complex Order
Subsidy Program, Footnotes 29 and 30.
\22\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Footnote 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition that are not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange 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, while different fees
are assessed to different market participants in some circumstances,
these different market participants have different obligations and
different circumstances as discussed above. For example, Market-Makers
have quoting obligations that other market participants do not have.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because MXEA and
MXEF will be exclusively listed on CBOE. To the extent that the
proposed changes make CBOE a more attractive marketplace for market
participants at other exchanges, such market participants are welcome
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 \23\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \24\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\24\ 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-2015-041 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-2015-041. 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-CBOE-2015-041 and should be
submitted on or before May 27, 2015.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-10505 Filed 5-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P