Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change to Require an Indicator When a TRACE Report Does Not Reflect a Commission or Mark-Up/Mark-Down, 47546-47550 [2015-19381]

Download as PDF 47546 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Notices change and require that the proposed rule change be refiled in accordance with the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Act.12 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 (http://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– CFE–2015–005 on the subject line. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 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–CFE–2015–005. 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 (http://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 such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR–CFE– 2015–005, and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2015. 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:24 Aug 06, 2015 For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.13 Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–19572 Filed 8–5–15; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P [FR Doc. 2015–19382 Filed 8–6–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34–75588; File No. SR–FINRA– 2015–026] [File No. 500–1] In the Matter of Solar Acquisition Corp., Order of Suspension of Trading August 5, 2015. Solar Acquisition Corp. (CIK No. 0001375495) is a Florida corporation located in Ann Arbor, Michigan with a class of securities registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’). Solar Acquisition Corp. is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10–K for the period ended December 31, 2012. On November 6, 2014, the Division of Corporation Finance sent Solar Acquisition Corp. a delinquency letter requesting compliance with its periodic filing obligations, but the letter was returned because of Solar Acquisition Corp.’s failure to maintain a valid address on file with the Commission. As of June 16, 2015, the company’s stock (symbol ‘‘SLRX’’) was quoted on OTC Link (previously, ‘‘Pink Sheets’’) operated by OTC Markets Group, Inc., had eight market makers, and was eligible for the ‘‘piggyback’’ exception of Exchange Act Rule 15c2–11(f)(3). It appears to the Commission that there is a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of Solar Acquisition Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since its Form 10–K for the period ended December 31, 2012. The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of Solar Acquisition Corp. Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Exchange Act, that trading in the securities of Solar Acquisition Corp. is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on August 5, 2015, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on August 18, 2015. 13 17 Jkt 235001 By the Commission. Brent J. Fields, Secretary. PO 00000 CFR 200.30–3(a)(73). Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change to Require an Indicator When a TRACE Report Does Not Reflect a Commission or Mark-Up/ Mark-Down August 3, 2015. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on July 20, 2015, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. 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 FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 6730 (Transaction Reporting) to require an indicator when the TRACE report does not reflect a commission or mark-up/mark-down. Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is in italics.3 * * * * * 6000. Quotation and Transaction Reporting Facilities * * * * * 6700. Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (Trace) * * * * * 6730. Transaction Reporting (a) through (b) No Change. (c) Transaction Information To Be Reported. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). CFR 240.19b-4. 3 The text of the proposed rule change reflects rule text approved by the SEC in SR–FINRA–2014– 050, but which does not become effective until November 2, 2015. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74482 (March 11, 2015); 80 FR 13940 (March 17, 2015) (Order Approving File No. SR– FINRA–2014–050). 2 17 E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Notices Each TRACE trade report shall contain the following information: (1) through (10) No Change. (11) The commission (total dollar amount), if applicable; (12) through (13) No Change. (d) Procedures for Reporting Price, Capacity, Volume. (1) Price. For principal transactions, report the price, which must include the mark-up or mark-down. (However, if a price field is not available, report the contract amount and, if applicable, the accrued interest.) For agency transactions, report the price, which must exclude the commission. (However, if a price field is not available, report the contract amount and, if applicable, the accrued interest.) Report the total dollar amount of the commission if one is assessed on the transaction. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a member is not required to include a commission, mark-up or mark-down where one is not assessed on a trade-by-trade basis at the time of the transaction or where the amount is not known at the time the trade report is due. In all cases, a member must use the No Remuneration indicator as provided in paragraph (d)(4)(F) where a trade report does not reflect either a commission, mark-up or mark-down. (2) through (3) No Change. (4) Modifiers; Indicators. Members shall append the applicable trade report modifiers or indicators as specified by FINRA to all transaction reports. (A) through (E) No Change. (F) No Remuneration Indicator. Where a trade report does not reflect either a commission, mark-up or markdown, select the No Remuneration indicator. (e) through (f) No Change. • • • Supplementary Material: .01 through .02 No Change. * * * * * tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, FINRA 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. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:24 Aug 06, 2015 Jkt 235001 A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose FINRA Rule 6730 (Transaction Reporting) sets forth the requirements applicable to members reporting transactions in TRACE-Eligible Securities,4 and provides the specific items of information that must be included in a TRACE trade report. Among other things, Rules 6730(c) and (d) require that firms report the commission (total dollar amount) separately on the TRACE trade report for agency transactions. FINRA then combines the dollar amount that is reported as the commission with the amount that is reported in the price field, and disseminates to the market this aggregate amount as the transaction’s price. For principal transactions, Rule 6730(d)(1) provides that firms must report a price that includes the mark-up/mark-down, and FINRA disseminates this price to the market. The goal of these reporting requirements is to enable FINRA to provide investors and market participants with pricing information that better reflects comparable prices for principal and agency trades in a TRACE-Eligible Security. FINRA is proposing that firms identify those transactions for which a commission or mark-up/mark-down is not reflected in a TRACE trade report because the firm does not charge or does not know the amount of the commission or mark-up/mark-down at the time of TRACE reporting. For example, some firms may assess a charge that is not transaction-based, such as in the case of a ‘‘fee-based account’’ where remuneration is based upon assets under management (and individual commissions or mark-ups/mark-downs are not charged).5 As a result, when the price of the transaction is publicly disseminated, there currently is no 4 Rule 6710 generally defines a ‘‘TRACE-Eligible Security’’ as: (1) A debt security that is U.S. dollardenominated and issued by a U.S. or foreign private issuer (and, if a ‘‘restricted security’’ as defined in Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3), sold pursuant to Securities Act Rule 144A); or (2) a debt security that is U.S. dollar-denominated and issued or guaranteed by an ‘‘Agency’’ as defined in Rule 6710(k) or a ‘‘Government-Sponsored Enterprise’’ as defined in Rule 6710(n). Most transactions reported to TRACE are publicly disseminated immediately upon receipt of a transaction report. 5 Another example of a fee structure that is not transaction-based is where an ATS charges subscribers a fixed fee for unlimited trading each month. The ATS could then execute trades either as principal, by acting as an intermediary in all subscriber trades, or on an agency basis, by providing the system through which subscribers’ trades are executed. PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 47547 indication to the public that the price is not inclusive of a commission or markup/mark-down. By way of further example, some firms charge a commission or mark-up/ mark-down, but may not know the exact amount of that commission or mark-up/ mark-down at the time the TRACE transaction report is required to be submitted because of their remuneration structure (e.g., a firm may not calculate a mark-up for a transaction on a tradeby-trade basis, but will, nonetheless, ultimately assess transaction remuneration pursuant to a monthly volume-based schedule). As a result, the firm will not know the commission or mark-up/mark-down at the time of TRACE reporting.6 FINRA therefore proposes to require firms to identify such trades, and FINRA will flag these disseminated transactions as not being inclusive of remuneration.7 As is the case now, the disseminated TRACE feed will not explicitly distinguish between agency and principal transactions, and the noremuneration flag will apply to both principal and agency transactions. FINRA believes that pricing information disseminated today may be incomplete and, in some cases, misleading given that disseminated prices on transactions that do not include remuneration are not distinguished from transactions that do include a commission or mark-up/ mark-down. FINRA believes that the proposal will provide more meaningful pricing transparency through TRACE by identifying those transactions where no commission or mark-up/mark-down was charged or known at the time of TRACE reporting, while not inhibiting possible firm remuneration arrangements, particularly if these arrangements benefit customers. FINRA also believes that this proposal will enhance its regulatory audit trail 6 As a practical matter, it is difficult for firms to comply with the current TRACE rules for these types of volume-based mark-up/mark-down arrangements, since firms are unable to report accurately all the required information related to the transaction on a timely basis and would need to submit a cancel and replace to update the pricing information. In some cases, this information may not be known until the end of the month. Under the proposal, members would not be required to reflect a mark-up/mark-down or commission in a TRACE trade report where the charge is not known at the time of the transaction, but would be required to report the proposed identifier. 7 In addition, if a firm does not charge any remuneration associated with the trade (in any form), they would be required to identify the trade as one for which no remuneration was assessed to the transaction. FINRA notes that the MSRB has similarly proposed to require members to report an indicator that would be disseminated to identify transactions that do not include a dealer compensation component. See MSRB Regulatory Notice 2014–14 (August 13, 2014). E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1 47548 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Notices tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES and surveillance patterns. With this additional level of detail, surveillance patterns should yield fewer false positives regarding mark-up and best execution surveillance, reduce regulatory inquiries, and provide greater focus for FINRA’s regulatory efforts. For example, without this designation, FINRA’s surveillance patterns for best execution may generate an alert for transactions whose prices reflect a commission or a mark-up as being outliers compared to transactions whose prices do not reflect a charge. FINRA discussed the proposal with advisory committees in developing its approach. These parties were supportive of the proposal, believing that it would improve the value of information for TRACE-Eligible Securities that is submitted to FINRA, and, by extension, to investors and market participants. With regards to effort involved in affecting the change, committee members did not express any particular concerns with respect to the operational impacts or costs of the proposal. However, as to facilitate planning and scheduling, firms specifically requested that sufficient lead-time be provided when determining the effective date of the rule. Further discussions with firms that would be directly impacted by the proposal also indicated that the proposal would be beneficial to market participants, and that the necessary technological changes would not be unduly burdensome given an adequate implementation timeframe. If the Commission approves the proposed rule change, the proposed rule change shall be effective upon Commission approval. The implementation date will be May 23, 2016. 2. Statutory Basis FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,8 which requires, among other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest, and Section 15A(b)(9) of the Act,9 which requires that FINRA rules not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate. FINRA believes that this proposal is consistent with the Act because the additional identifier will enhance its regulatory audit trail and surveillance patterns. With this additional level of 8 15 9 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(9). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:24 Aug 06, 2015 Jkt 235001 detail, surveillance patterns should yield fewer false positives regarding mark-up and best execution surveillance, reduce regulatory inquiries, and provide greater focus for FINRA’s regulatory efforts. For example, without this designation, FINRA’s surveillance patterns for best execution may generate an alert for transactions whose prices reflect a commission or a mark-up as being outliers compared to transactions whose prices do not reflect a charge. FINRA also believes that the proposal will improve the information value of TRACE reports as investors and other market participants will receive additional information regarding pricing information for TRACE-Eligible Securities. Finally, FINRA believes that this proposal would permit firms additional flexibility in structuring their fee arrangements with investors, which may provide cost benefits to such investors. B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Burden on Competition FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. FINRA notes that the proposed rule change is designed to assist FINRA in meeting its regulatory obligations by enhancing its audit trail and surveillance patterns. While this proposal will require members to meet the proposed reporting obligation, ensure that they can properly ascertain transactions that require the new identifier, and update their compliance procedures and reporting protocols accordingly, FINRA notes that this proposal will apply uniformly to firms that report transactions in TRACEEligible Securities. FINRA also believes that this proposal will allow firms more flexibility in designing their fee structures. As set forth above, FINRA has undertaken an economic impact assessment to further analyze, among other things, the need for the proposed rulemaking and the economic impacts of the proposed rulemaking. As discussed above, FINRA does not believe that the compliance costs associated with the proposal would be unduly burdensome given an adequate implementation timeframe. Economic Impact Assessment FINRA has undertaken an economic impact assessment, as set forth below, to further analyze the need for the proposed rulemaking, the regulatory objective of the rulemaking, the economic baseline of analysis, and the economic impacts. PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 (a) Need for the Rule FINRA believes that pricing information disseminated today may be incomplete and, in some cases, misleading given that disseminated prices on transactions that do not include remuneration are not distinguished from transactions that do include a commission or mark-up/markdown. (b) Regulatory Objective FINRA believes that the proposal will provide more meaningful pricing transparency through TRACE by identifying those transactions where no commission or mark-up/mark-down was charged or known at the time of TRACE reporting, while not inhibiting possible firm fee remuneration arrangements, particularly if these fee arrangements benefit customers. FINRA also believes that the additional identifier will enhance its regulatory audit trail and surveillance patterns, because it will require the firm to affirmatively report this information related to the commission or mark-up/mark-down and will enable FINRA to more efficiently separate out no-remuneration trades for purposes of surveillance, analysis, and dissemination. (c) Economic Baseline The staff analyzed corporate bond transactions reported to TRACE in Q3 2013.10 Transactions where the brokerdealer acts in an agency capacity are reported to TRACE with a separate field for commission. FINRA can therefore accurately identify agency-capacity transactions reported without a commission.11 In contrast, for transactions where the broker-dealer acts in a principal capacity, the mark-up or mark-down is included in the reported price. It was necessary for the staff to pair a broker-dealer’s buy and 10 For purposes of this analysis, FINRA used data reported to TRACE (not the TRACE-disseminated data). Although the TRACE-disseminated data includes a flag (Y or blank) that identifies whether a commission is included in the disseminated price, the data does not specify in what capacity the dealer acted in the transaction. As such, an agency transaction without a commission, e.g., the commission flag is blank, would look the same on the TRACE-disseminated data as a principal transaction with or without a mark-up/mark-down. Corporate bond transactions represented approximately 73% of all transactions reported to TRACE in 2013. 11 Although FINRA is currently able to accurately identify agency-capacity transactions that are reported without a commission, this process requires FINRA to match trades where the commission field is blank with trades where the dealer acted as agent. With the no-remuneration flag, the firm will be required to affirmatively report this information related to the commission or markup/mark-down, and FINRA will be able to more efficiently identify such trades. E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1 47549 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Notices sell principal-capacity transactions of equal sizes in a given security on a given day to estimate the mark-ups or mark-downs on the customer transactions.12 During Q3 2013, the daily average number of agency-capacity transactions in corporate bonds was 9,100.13 Approximately 55% of agency-capacity transactions in corporate bonds were customer transactions. Based on the data, the staff estimated that approximately 85% of Investment Grade corporate bond customer transactions where the broker-dealer acted in an agency capacity were reported without a commission. For Non-Investment Grade and unrated corporate bonds, the proportions were 74% and 92%, respectively. Such transactions may have been executed for fee-based accounts or other accounts where firm remuneration was not determined on a per-transaction basis. For the agencycapacity customer transactions reported with commissions, the table below summarizes the average commission charged for agency-capacity customer buy and customer sell transactions in Investment Grade, Non-Investment Grade and Unrated securities over the quarter. Average commission (in basis points) Investment grade Customer Buy ............................................................................................................ Customer Sell ............................................................................................................ During Q3 2013, the daily average number of principal-capacity transactions in corporate bonds was just under 48,000.14 Approximately 45% of principal-capacity transactions in corporate bonds were customer transactions. Using the previously Non-Investment grade 18 21 described pairing methodology, the staff estimated that 19% of these customer transactions were reported to have been executed without a mark-up or markdown. For the principal-capacity customer transactions estimated to include mark-ups or mark-downs, the Unrated 21 20 21 32 table below summarizes the estimated average remuneration charged for principal-capacity customer buy and customer sell transactions in Investment Grade, Non-Investment Grade and Unrated securities in the quarter. Average mark-up/mark-down (in basis points) Investment grade Customer Buy ............................................................................................................ Customer Sell ............................................................................................................ tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES (d) Economic Impacts FINRA believes that the proposal will enable market participants, including investors relying on TRACE for valuation information, to better understand the prevailing market prices by being able to distinguish between transactions that include remuneration and those that do not. As discussed above, FINRA further believes that the additional identifier will enhance its regulatory audit trail and surveillance patterns. With this additional level of detail, surveillance patterns should yield fewer false positives regarding mark-up and best execution surveillance, reduce regulatory inquiries, and provide greater focus for FINRA’s regulatory efforts. For example, without this designation, FINRA’s surveillance patterns for best execution may generate an alert for transactions whose prices reflect a commission or a mark-up as being outliers compared to 12 FINRA recognizes that any pairing methodology adopted requires assumptions as part of that methodology. Further, there is not a unique set of assumptions that reasonable parties might all choose to adopt if they were to go through a similar exercise. As a result, FINRA provides results of this VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:24 Aug 06, 2015 Jkt 235001 Non-investment grade 75 50 Unrated 66 78 73 60 transactions whose prices do not reflect a charge. The proposal will require member firms to meet the proposed reporting obligation, ensure that they can properly ascertain transactions that require the new identifier, and update their compliance procedures and reporting protocols accordingly. Member firms would also need to make technological changes to their systems to include the identifier. Based on discussions with advisory committees and member firms, FINRA does not believe that the compliance costs associated with the proposal would be unduly burdensome given an adequate implementation timeframe. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others IV. Solicitation of Comments Written comments were neither solicited nor received. methodology as part of the baseline in order to inform the discussion of potential regulatory impacts. 13 This excludes List or Fixed Offering Price Transactions, as defined in FINRA Rule 6710(q), PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will: (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. 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. and Takedown Transactions as defined in FINRA Rule 6710(r). 14 This excludes List or Fixed Offering Price Transactions, as defined in FINRA Rule 6710(q), and Takedown Transactions as defined in FINRA Rule 6710(r). E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1 47550 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Notices Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Electronic Comments [Release No. IC–31732] • Use the Commission’s Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– FINRA–2015–026 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. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES All submissions should refer to File Number SR–FINRA–2015–026. 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 (http://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 FINRA. 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–FINRA– 2015–026 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2015. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.15 Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–19381 Filed 8–6–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:24 Aug 06, 2015 Jkt 235001 Notice of Applications for Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 July 31, 2015. The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of July 2015. A copy of each application may be obtained via the Commission’s Web site by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/ search.htm or by calling (202) 551– 8090. An order granting each application will be issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by writing to the SEC’s Secretary at the address below and serving the relevant applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on August 25, 2015, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule 0–5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer’s interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission’s Secretary. ADDRESSES: The Commission: Brent J. Fields, Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane L. Titus at (202) 551–6810, SEC, Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel’s Office, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549–8010. Dow 30 Premium & Dividend Income Fund Inc. [File No. 811–21708] Dow 30 Enhanced Premium & Income Fund Inc. [File No. 811–22029] Summary: Each applicant, a closedend investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicants transferred their assets to Nuveen Dow 30sm Dynamic Overwrite Fund, and on December 22, 2014, made distributions to their shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of $536,640 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by applicants. PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Filing Date: The applications were filed on June 26, 2015. Applicants’ Address: 333 West Wacker Dr., Chicago, IL 60606. Encompass Funds [File No. 811–21885] Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On May 29, 2015, applicant made a liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value. Expenses of $14,433 incurred in connection with the liquidation were paid by Brick Asset Management, Inc., applicant’s investment adviser. Filing Date: The application was filed on July 17, 2015. Applicant’s Address: 1700 California St., Ste. 335, San Francisco, CA 94109. KKR Series Trust [File No. 811–22720] Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On March 31, 2014, applicant made a liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value. Expenses in connection with the liquidation were paid by KKR Credit Advisors (US) LLC, applicant’s investment adviser. Filing Date: The application was filed on July 17, 2015. Applicant’s Address: 555 California St., 50th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104. BlackRock MuniYield New Jersey Quality Fund, Inc. [File No. 811–7138] Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant transferred its assets to BlackRock MuniHoldings New Jersey Quality Fund, Inc. on July 13, 2015. Expenses of $310,020 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by applicant and BlackRock Advisors, LLC, applicant’s investment adviser. Filing Date: The application was filed on July 9, 2015. Applicant’s Address: 100 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, DE 19809. John Hancock Tax-Exempt Series Fund [File No. 811–5079] Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant transferred its assets to John Hancock Tax-Free Bond Fund, a series of John Hancock Municipal Securities Trust, and on February 13, 2015, made distributions to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of $201,891 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by applicant and John Hancock Advisers, LLC, applicant’s investment adviser. E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 152 (Friday, August 7, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47546-47550]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19381]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75588; File No. SR-FINRA-2015-026]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory 
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change to Require 
an Indicator When a TRACE Report Does Not Reflect a Commission or Mark-
Up/Mark-Down

August 3, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that 
on July 20, 2015, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, 
and III below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. 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

    FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 6730 (Transaction Reporting) 
to require an indicator when the TRACE report does not reflect a 
commission or mark-up/mark-down.
    Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new 
language is in italics.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The text of the proposed rule change reflects rule text 
approved by the SEC in SR-FINRA-2014-050, but which does not become 
effective until November 2, 2015. See Securities Exchange Act 
Release No. 74482 (March 11, 2015); 80 FR 13940 (March 17, 2015) 
(Order Approving File No. SR-FINRA-2014-050).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

6000. Quotation and Transaction Reporting Facilities

* * * * *

6700. Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (Trace)

* * * * *

6730. Transaction Reporting

    (a) through (b) No Change.
    (c) Transaction Information To Be Reported.

[[Page 47547]]

    Each TRACE trade report shall contain the following information:
    (1) through (10) No Change.
    (11) The commission (total dollar amount), if applicable;
    (12) through (13) No Change.
    (d) Procedures for Reporting Price, Capacity, Volume.
    (1) Price.
    For principal transactions, report the price, which must include 
the mark-up or mark-down. (However, if a price field is not available, 
report the contract amount and, if applicable, the accrued interest.) 
For agency transactions, report the price, which must exclude the 
commission. (However, if a price field is not available, report the 
contract amount and, if applicable, the accrued interest.) Report the 
total dollar amount of the commission if one is assessed on the 
transaction. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a member is not required to 
include a commission, mark-up or mark-down where one is not assessed on 
a trade-by-trade basis at the time of the transaction or where the 
amount is not known at the time the trade report is due. In all cases, 
a member must use the No Remuneration indicator as provided in 
paragraph (d)(4)(F) where a trade report does not reflect either a 
commission, mark-up or mark-down.
    (2) through (3) No Change.
    (4) Modifiers; Indicators.
    Members shall append the applicable trade report modifiers or 
indicators as specified by FINRA to all transaction reports.
    (A) through (E) No Change.
    (F) No Remuneration Indicator.
    Where a trade report does not reflect either a commission, mark-up 
or mark-down, select the No Remuneration indicator.
    (e) through (f) No Change.
       Supplementary Material:
    .01 through .02 No Change.
* * * * *

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, FINRA 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. FINRA 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
    FINRA Rule 6730 (Transaction Reporting) sets forth the requirements 
applicable to members reporting transactions in TRACE-Eligible 
Securities,\4\ and provides the specific items of information that must 
be included in a TRACE trade report. Among other things, Rules 6730(c) 
and (d) require that firms report the commission (total dollar amount) 
separately on the TRACE trade report for agency transactions. FINRA 
then combines the dollar amount that is reported as the commission with 
the amount that is reported in the price field, and disseminates to the 
market this aggregate amount as the transaction's price. For principal 
transactions, Rule 6730(d)(1) provides that firms must report a price 
that includes the mark-up/mark-down, and FINRA disseminates this price 
to the market. The goal of these reporting requirements is to enable 
FINRA to provide investors and market participants with pricing 
information that better reflects comparable prices for principal and 
agency trades in a TRACE-Eligible Security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Rule 6710 generally defines a ``TRACE-Eligible Security'' 
as: (1) A debt security that is U.S. dollar-denominated and issued 
by a U.S. or foreign private issuer (and, if a ``restricted 
security'' as defined in Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3), sold 
pursuant to Securities Act Rule 144A); or (2) a debt security that 
is U.S. dollar-denominated and issued or guaranteed by an ``Agency'' 
as defined in Rule 6710(k) or a ``Government-Sponsored Enterprise'' 
as defined in Rule 6710(n). Most transactions reported to TRACE are 
publicly disseminated immediately upon receipt of a transaction 
report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA is proposing that firms identify those transactions for which 
a commission or mark-up/mark-down is not reflected in a TRACE trade 
report because the firm does not charge or does not know the amount of 
the commission or mark-up/mark-down at the time of TRACE reporting. For 
example, some firms may assess a charge that is not transaction-based, 
such as in the case of a ``fee-based account'' where remuneration is 
based upon assets under management (and individual commissions or mark-
ups/mark-downs are not charged).\5\ As a result, when the price of the 
transaction is publicly disseminated, there currently is no indication 
to the public that the price is not inclusive of a commission or mark-
up/mark-down.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Another example of a fee structure that is not transaction-
based is where an ATS charges subscribers a fixed fee for unlimited 
trading each month. The ATS could then execute trades either as 
principal, by acting as an intermediary in all subscriber trades, or 
on an agency basis, by providing the system through which 
subscribers' trades are executed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By way of further example, some firms charge a commission or mark-
up/mark-down, but may not know the exact amount of that commission or 
mark-up/mark-down at the time the TRACE transaction report is required 
to be submitted because of their remuneration structure (e.g., a firm 
may not calculate a mark-up for a transaction on a trade-by-trade 
basis, but will, nonetheless, ultimately assess transaction 
remuneration pursuant to a monthly volume-based schedule). As a result, 
the firm will not know the commission or mark-up/mark-down at the time 
of TRACE reporting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As a practical matter, it is difficult for firms to comply 
with the current TRACE rules for these types of volume-based mark-
up/mark-down arrangements, since firms are unable to report 
accurately all the required information related to the transaction 
on a timely basis and would need to submit a cancel and replace to 
update the pricing information. In some cases, this information may 
not be known until the end of the month. Under the proposal, members 
would not be required to reflect a mark-up/mark-down or commission 
in a TRACE trade report where the charge is not known at the time of 
the transaction, but would be required to report the proposed 
identifier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA therefore proposes to require firms to identify such trades, 
and FINRA will flag these disseminated transactions as not being 
inclusive of remuneration.\7\ As is the case now, the disseminated 
TRACE feed will not explicitly distinguish between agency and principal 
transactions, and the no-remuneration flag will apply to both principal 
and agency transactions. FINRA believes that pricing information 
disseminated today may be incomplete and, in some cases, misleading 
given that disseminated prices on transactions that do not include 
remuneration are not distinguished from transactions that do include a 
commission or mark-up/mark-down. FINRA believes that the proposal will 
provide more meaningful pricing transparency through TRACE by 
identifying those transactions where no commission or mark-up/mark-down 
was charged or known at the time of TRACE reporting, while not 
inhibiting possible firm remuneration arrangements, particularly if 
these arrangements benefit customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In addition, if a firm does not charge any remuneration 
associated with the trade (in any form), they would be required to 
identify the trade as one for which no remuneration was assessed to 
the transaction. FINRA notes that the MSRB has similarly proposed to 
require members to report an indicator that would be disseminated to 
identify transactions that do not include a dealer compensation 
component. See MSRB Regulatory Notice 2014-14 (August 13, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also believes that this proposal will enhance its regulatory 
audit trail

[[Page 47548]]

and surveillance patterns. With this additional level of detail, 
surveillance patterns should yield fewer false positives regarding 
mark-up and best execution surveillance, reduce regulatory inquiries, 
and provide greater focus for FINRA's regulatory efforts. For example, 
without this designation, FINRA's surveillance patterns for best 
execution may generate an alert for transactions whose prices reflect a 
commission or a mark-up as being outliers compared to transactions 
whose prices do not reflect a charge.
    FINRA discussed the proposal with advisory committees in developing 
its approach. These parties were supportive of the proposal, believing 
that it would improve the value of information for TRACE-Eligible 
Securities that is submitted to FINRA, and, by extension, to investors 
and market participants. With regards to effort involved in affecting 
the change, committee members did not express any particular concerns 
with respect to the operational impacts or costs of the proposal. 
However, as to facilitate planning and scheduling, firms specifically 
requested that sufficient lead-time be provided when determining the 
effective date of the rule. Further discussions with firms that would 
be directly impacted by the proposal also indicated that the proposal 
would be beneficial to market participants, and that the necessary 
technological changes would not be unduly burdensome given an adequate 
implementation timeframe.
    If the Commission approves the proposed rule change, the proposed 
rule change shall be effective upon Commission approval. The 
implementation date will be May 23, 2016.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\8\ which requires, among 
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent 
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable 
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the 
public interest, and Section 15A(b)(9) of the Act,\9\ which requires 
that FINRA rules not impose any burden on competition that is not 
necessary or appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that this proposal is consistent with the Act 
because the additional identifier will enhance its regulatory audit 
trail and surveillance patterns. With this additional level of detail, 
surveillance patterns should yield fewer false positives regarding 
mark-up and best execution surveillance, reduce regulatory inquiries, 
and provide greater focus for FINRA's regulatory efforts. For example, 
without this designation, FINRA's surveillance patterns for best 
execution may generate an alert for transactions whose prices reflect a 
commission or a mark-up as being outliers compared to transactions 
whose prices do not reflect a charge. FINRA also believes that the 
proposal will improve the information value of TRACE reports as 
investors and other market participants will receive additional 
information regarding pricing information for TRACE-Eligible 
Securities. Finally, FINRA believes that this proposal would permit 
firms additional flexibility in structuring their fee arrangements with 
investors, which may provide cost benefits to such investors.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in 
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. FINRA notes that the proposed 
rule change is designed to assist FINRA in meeting its regulatory 
obligations by enhancing its audit trail and surveillance patterns. 
While this proposal will require members to meet the proposed reporting 
obligation, ensure that they can properly ascertain transactions that 
require the new identifier, and update their compliance procedures and 
reporting protocols accordingly, FINRA notes that this proposal will 
apply uniformly to firms that report transactions in TRACE-Eligible 
Securities. FINRA also believes that this proposal will allow firms 
more flexibility in designing their fee structures.
    As set forth above, FINRA has undertaken an economic impact 
assessment to further analyze, among other things, the need for the 
proposed rulemaking and the economic impacts of the proposed 
rulemaking. As discussed above, FINRA does not believe that the 
compliance costs associated with the proposal would be unduly 
burdensome given an adequate implementation timeframe.
Economic Impact Assessment
    FINRA has undertaken an economic impact assessment, as set forth 
below, to further analyze the need for the proposed rulemaking, the 
regulatory objective of the rulemaking, the economic baseline of 
analysis, and the economic impacts.
(a) Need for the Rule
    FINRA believes that pricing information disseminated today may be 
incomplete and, in some cases, misleading given that disseminated 
prices on transactions that do not include remuneration are not 
distinguished from transactions that do include a commission or mark-
up/mark-down.
(b) Regulatory Objective
    FINRA believes that the proposal will provide more meaningful 
pricing transparency through TRACE by identifying those transactions 
where no commission or mark-up/mark-down was charged or known at the 
time of TRACE reporting, while not inhibiting possible firm fee 
remuneration arrangements, particularly if these fee arrangements 
benefit customers. FINRA also believes that the additional identifier 
will enhance its regulatory audit trail and surveillance patterns, 
because it will require the firm to affirmatively report this 
information related to the commission or mark-up/mark-down and will 
enable FINRA to more efficiently separate out no-remuneration trades 
for purposes of surveillance, analysis, and dissemination.
(c) Economic Baseline
    The staff analyzed corporate bond transactions reported to TRACE in 
Q3 2013.\10\ Transactions where the broker-dealer acts in an agency 
capacity are reported to TRACE with a separate field for commission. 
FINRA can therefore accurately identify agency-capacity transactions 
reported without a commission.\11\ In contrast, for transactions where 
the broker-dealer acts in a principal capacity, the mark-up or mark-
down is included in the reported price. It was necessary for the staff 
to pair a broker-dealer's buy and

[[Page 47549]]

sell principal-capacity transactions of equal sizes in a given security 
on a given day to estimate the mark-ups or mark-downs on the customer 
transactions.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For purposes of this analysis, FINRA used data reported to 
TRACE (not the TRACE-disseminated data). Although the TRACE-
disseminated data includes a flag (Y or blank) that identifies 
whether a commission is included in the disseminated price, the data 
does not specify in what capacity the dealer acted in the 
transaction. As such, an agency transaction without a commission, 
e.g., the commission flag is blank, would look the same on the 
TRACE-disseminated data as a principal transaction with or without a 
mark-up/mark-down.
    Corporate bond transactions represented approximately 73% of all 
transactions reported to TRACE in 2013.
    \11\ Although FINRA is currently able to accurately identify 
agency-capacity transactions that are reported without a commission, 
this process requires FINRA to match trades where the commission 
field is blank with trades where the dealer acted as agent. With the 
no-remuneration flag, the firm will be required to affirmatively 
report this information related to the commission or mark-up/mark-
down, and FINRA will be able to more efficiently identify such 
trades.
    \12\ FINRA recognizes that any pairing methodology adopted 
requires assumptions as part of that methodology. Further, there is 
not a unique set of assumptions that reasonable parties might all 
choose to adopt if they were to go through a similar exercise. As a 
result, FINRA provides results of this methodology as part of the 
baseline in order to inform the discussion of potential regulatory 
impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During Q3 2013, the daily average number of agency-capacity 
transactions in corporate bonds was 9,100.\13\ Approximately 55% of 
agency-capacity transactions in corporate bonds were customer 
transactions. Based on the data, the staff estimated that approximately 
85% of Investment Grade corporate bond customer transactions where the 
broker-dealer acted in an agency capacity were reported without a 
commission. For Non-Investment Grade and unrated corporate bonds, the 
proportions were 74% and 92%, respectively. Such transactions may have 
been executed for fee-based accounts or other accounts where firm 
remuneration was not determined on a per-transaction basis. For the 
agency-capacity customer transactions reported with commissions, the 
table below summarizes the average commission charged for agency-
capacity customer buy and customer sell transactions in Investment 
Grade, Non-Investment Grade and Unrated securities over the quarter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ This excludes List or Fixed Offering Price Transactions, as 
defined in FINRA Rule 6710(q), and Takedown Transactions as defined 
in FINRA Rule 6710(r).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Average commission (in basis points)
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Non-Investment
                                                          Investment grade        grade             Unrated
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Buy...........................................                 18                 21                 21
Customer Sell..........................................                 21                 20                 32
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During Q3 2013, the daily average number of principal-capacity 
transactions in corporate bonds was just under 48,000.\14\ 
Approximately 45% of principal-capacity transactions in corporate bonds 
were customer transactions. Using the previously described pairing 
methodology, the staff estimated that 19% of these customer 
transactions were reported to have been executed without a mark-up or 
mark-down. For the principal-capacity customer transactions estimated 
to include mark-ups or mark-downs, the table below summarizes the 
estimated average remuneration charged for principal-capacity customer 
buy and customer sell transactions in Investment Grade, Non-Investment 
Grade and Unrated securities in the quarter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ This excludes List or Fixed Offering Price Transactions, as 
defined in FINRA Rule 6710(q), and Takedown Transactions as defined 
in FINRA Rule 6710(r).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Average mark-up/mark-down (in basis points)
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Non-investment
                                                          Investment grade        grade             Unrated
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Buy...........................................                 75                 66                 73
Customer Sell..........................................                 50                 78                 60
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Economic Impacts
    FINRA believes that the proposal will enable market participants, 
including investors relying on TRACE for valuation information, to 
better understand the prevailing market prices by being able to 
distinguish between transactions that include remuneration and those 
that do not. As discussed above, FINRA further believes that the 
additional identifier will enhance its regulatory audit trail and 
surveillance patterns. With this additional level of detail, 
surveillance patterns should yield fewer false positives regarding 
mark-up and best execution surveillance, reduce regulatory inquiries, 
and provide greater focus for FINRA's regulatory efforts. For example, 
without this designation, FINRA's surveillance patterns for best 
execution may generate an alert for transactions whose prices reflect a 
commission or a mark-up as being outliers compared to transactions 
whose prices do not reflect a charge.
    The proposal will require member firms to meet the proposed 
reporting obligation, ensure that they can properly ascertain 
transactions that require the new identifier, and update their 
compliance procedures and reporting protocols accordingly. Member firms 
would also need to make technological changes to their systems to 
include the identifier. Based on discussions with advisory committees 
and member firms, FINRA does not believe that the compliance costs 
associated with the proposal would be unduly burdensome given an 
adequate implementation timeframe.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed 
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 
Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the 
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may 
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to 
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to 
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule 
change should be 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.

[[Page 47550]]

Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include 
File Number SR-FINRA-2015-026 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-FINRA-2015-026. 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 (http://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 FINRA. 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-FINRA-2015-026 and should be 
submitted on or before August 28, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-19381 Filed 8-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P