Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule, 77070-77072 [2015-31178]
Download as PDF
77070
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 238 / Friday, December 11, 2015 / Notices
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. If the
Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings
under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 20 of the Act to
determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or
disapproved.
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–
NYSEARCA–2015–117 and should be
submitted on or before January 4, 2016.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.21
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–31277 Filed 12–10–15; 8:45 am]
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
NYSEARCA–2015–117 on the subject
line.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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:
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the Fees
Schedule
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NYSEARCA–2015–117.
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 Section, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090. Copies of
the filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the NYSE’s
principal office and on its Internet Web
site at www.nyse.com. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–76567; File No. SR–CBOE–
2015–109]
December 7, 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 November
24, 2015, Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’
or ‘‘CBOE’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the
‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of the 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
21 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
20 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:55 Dec 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00145
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its
Fees Schedule.3 Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to increase the
Customer Priority Surcharge fee
assessed to contracts executed in VIX
volatility index options (‘‘VIX options’’)
and weekly S&P 500 options (‘‘SPXW
options’’). Currently, the VIX Customer
Priority Surcharge (‘‘VIX Surcharge’’) is
assessed on all Customer (C) VIX
contracts executed electronically that
are Maker and not Market Turner.
Additionally, the VIX Surcharge is only
assessed on such contracts that have a
premium of $0.11 or greater. The
Exchange proposes to increase the VIX
Surcharge from $0.10 per contract to
$0.20 per contract on such contracts that
have a premium of $0.11 or greater. The
SPXW Customer Priority Surcharge
(‘‘SPXW Surcharge’’) is currently
assessed on all Customer (C) SPXW
contracts executed electronically.4 The
Exchange also proposes to increase the
SPXW Surcharge from $0.05 per
contract to $0.10 per contract.
The Exchange also proposes to amend
the Fees Schedule with respect to the
Qualified Contingent Cross (‘‘QCC’’)
Orders Rate Table. By way of
background, the Fees Schedule
currently provides for a ‘‘QCC Rate
Table’’ which sets forth a transaction fee
and credit for QCC transactions. In
addition, the ‘‘Notes’’ section of the
QCC Rate Table includes the definition
of a QCC transaction. Specifically the
‘‘Notes’’ section currently provides that
‘‘A QCC transaction is comprised of an
‘initiating order’ to buy (sell) at least
1,000 contracts, coupled with a contraside order to sell (buy) an equal number
of contracts . . .’’ The Exchange notes
that it recently amended its QCC rules
to expand the availability of QCC orders
3 The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee
change on November 2, 2015 (SR–CBOE–2015–
101). On November 24, 2015, the Exchange
withdrew that filing and submitted this filing.
4 The SPXW Surcharge is not assessed to
contracts executed by a floor broker using a PAR
terminal or orders in SPXW options in SPXW
electronic book that are executed during opening
rotation on the final settlement day of VIX options
and futures which have the expiration that
contribute to the VIX settlement calculation.
E:\FR\FM\11DEN1.SGM
11DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 238 / Friday, December 11, 2015 / Notices
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
by permitting multiple contra-parties on
a QCC order.5 As such, the definition of
QCC Orders in CBOE Rule 6.53 has been
amended. The Exchange proposes to
similarly amend the Fees Schedule to
incorporate this new definition to
maintain consistency in the Rules and
Fees Schedule and avoid potential
confusion.
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.6 Specifically,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) 7 requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged
in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to,
and facilitation 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. The
Exchange also believes the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,8 which provides that
Exchange rules may provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its
Trading Permit Holders.
The Exchange believes that the SPXW
and VIX Customer Priority Surcharge
increases are reasonable because the
amount of the new fees are within the
range of surcharges assessed for
customer transactions in other CBOE
proprietary products (for example
customers are currently assessed a $0.20
Hybrid 3.0 Execution Surcharge (which
essentially acts as a customer priority
surcharge) in SPX options).
The Exchange believes that it is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess the SPXW and
VIX Priority Surcharges to Customers
and not other market participants
because Customers are not subject to
additional costs for effecting
transactions in SPXW and VIX which
are applicable to other market
participants, such as license surcharges.
Additionally, Customers are not subject
5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75756
(August 25, 2015), 80 FR 168 (August 31, 2015)
(SR–CBOE–2015–073).
6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:55 Dec 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
to fees applicable to other market
participants such as connectivity fees
and fees relating to Trading Permits, and
are not subject to the same obligations
as other market participants, including
regulatory and compliance requirements
and quoting obligations.
The Exchange notes that the VIX
Surcharge was adopted to minimize the
cost differentials between manual and
electronic executions (as Floor Brokers
assess a commission on customer
executions). As such, the Exchange
believes it’s equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess the VIX
Surcharge to Makers and not Takers
because electronic Maker orders are
analogous to customer orders
represented by Floor Brokers in open
outcry (as compared to Takers that
immediately remove liquidity and do
not rest in the book). The Exchange
believes it’s equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess only Makers in
VIX and both Makers and Takers in
SPXW because the SPX product group
has reached a mature and established
level since its introduction while VIX
has not and the Exchange therefore
wants to incentivize liquidity in VIX
and not discourage trading. The
Exchange also notes that another S&P
500 product (SPX) also charges a
surcharge to both Makers and Takers
(i.e., the Hybrid 3.0 Surcharge). The
Exchange believes that it is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory to only
assess the VIX Surcharge to Maker NonTurners because the Exchange wants to
encourage improving the market
(‘‘turning’’).
The Exchange believes that it is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to only assess the VIX
Surcharge when the contract premium
is at least $0.11 because the Exchange
wants to reduce costs on low priced VIX
options to encourage Customers to close
and roll over positions close to
expiration at low premium levels.
Currently, such Customers are less
likely to do this because the transaction
fee is closer to the premium level. The
Exchange believes that maintaining
lowered fees overall for VIX options
trading with a premium of $0.00–$0.10
will encourage the trading of such
options. As such, the Exchange does not
wish to assess the VIX Surcharge on
such options in order to keep the costs
low.
Finally, the Exchange believes that
codifying the amended definition of a
QCC transaction in the Fees Schedule
(in addition to the Exchange’s Rules,
where it is currently provided for), will
alleviate potential confusion and
maintain clarity in the Fees Schedule,
which serves to remove impediments to
PO 00000
Frm 00146
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77071
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.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
CBOE does not believe that the
proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act because,
while different electronic transaction
fees are assessed to different market
participants, different market
participants have different obligations
and circumstances as noted above. The
Exchange believes that the proposal to
increase the surcharge amount assessed
to Customers for executions in SPXW
and VIX contracts will not cause an
unnecessary burden on intermarket
competition because SPXW and VIX are
only traded 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.
Additionally, the proposed change to
codify in the Fees Schedule the revised
definition of a QCC order is not
intended for competitive reasons and
only applies to CBOE. The Exchange
notes that no rights or obligations of
Trading Permit Holders are affected by
this particular change.
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 9 and paragraph (f) of Rule
19b–4 10 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
9 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f).
10 17
E:\FR\FM\11DEN1.SGM
11DEN1
77072
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 238 / Friday, December 11, 2015 / Notices
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:
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.11
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–31178 Filed 12–10–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–76576; File No. SR–EDGX–
2015–59]
• 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–2015–109 on the subject line.
Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX
Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Delete Rule 22.10,
Limitation on Dealings, Related to the
EDGX Options Market
Paper Comments
December 8, 2015.
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Electronic Comments
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 December
1, 2015, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘EDGX’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared
by the Exchange. The Exchange has
designated this proposal as a ‘‘noncontroversial’’ proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii)
thereunder,4 which renders it effective
upon filing with the Commission. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2015–109. 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 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–CBOE–
2015–109, and should be submitted on
or before January 4, 2016.
11 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:55 Dec 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange filed a proposal for the
EDGX Options Market (‘‘EDGX
Options’’) to adopt a principles-based
approach to prohibit the misuse of
material nonpublic information by
Market Makers by deleting Rule 22.10
(Limitations on Dealings). The Exchange
has designated this proposal as noncontroversial and provided the
Commission with the notice required by
Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act.5
The text of the proposed rule change
is available at the Exchange’s Web site
at www.batstrading.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).
5 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).
PO 00000
Frm 00147
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant parts of such
statements.
(A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to adopt a
principles-based approach to prohibit
the misuse of material non-public
information by Market Makers by
deleting Rule 22.10 (Limitations on
Dealings). In doing so, the Exchange,
with regard to EDGX Options, would
harmonize its rules governing Market
Makers and Options Members that are
not Market Makers relating to the
protection against misuse of material,
non-public information. The Exchange
believes that Rule 22.10 is no longer
necessary because all Options Members,
including Market Makers, are subject to
the Exchange’s generally applicable
principles-based requirements
governing the protection against the
misuse of material, non-public
information, pursuant to Rule 5.5
(Prevention of the Misuse of Material,
Non-Public Information), which
obviates the need for separately
prescribed requirements for a subset of
Exchange participants. Additionally,
there is no separate regulatory purpose
served by having separate rules for
Market Makers. The Exchange notes that
this proposed rule change will not
decrease the protections against the
misuse of material, non-public
information; instead, it is designed to
provide more flexibility to Options
Members. This is a competitive filing
that is based on a proposal recently
submitted by NYSE MKT LLC (‘‘NYSE
MKT’’) and approved by the
Commission.6
Background
The Exchange has two classes of
EDGX Options participants.
6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75432
(July 13, 2015), 80 FR 42597 (July 17, 2015) (Order
Approving SR–NYSEMKT–2015–23).
E:\FR\FM\11DEN1.SGM
11DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 238 (Friday, December 11, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77070-77072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31178]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-76567; File No. SR-CBOE-2015-109]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule
December 7, 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 November 24, 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site (https://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's
Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule.\3\ Specifically,
the Exchange proposes to increase the Customer Priority Surcharge fee
assessed to contracts executed in VIX volatility index options (``VIX
options'') and weekly S&P 500 options (``SPXW options''). Currently,
the VIX Customer Priority Surcharge (``VIX Surcharge'') is assessed on
all Customer (C) VIX contracts executed electronically that are Maker
and not Market Turner. Additionally, the VIX Surcharge is only assessed
on such contracts that have a premium of $0.11 or greater. The Exchange
proposes to increase the VIX Surcharge from $0.10 per contract to $0.20
per contract on such contracts that have a premium of $0.11 or greater.
The SPXW Customer Priority Surcharge (``SPXW Surcharge'') is currently
assessed on all Customer (C) SPXW contracts executed electronically.\4\
The Exchange also proposes to increase the SPXW Surcharge from $0.05
per contract to $0.10 per contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee change on
November 2, 2015 (SR-CBOE-2015-101). On November 24, 2015, the
Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted this filing.
\4\ The SPXW Surcharge is not assessed to contracts executed by
a floor broker using a PAR terminal or orders in SPXW options in
SPXW electronic book that are executed during opening rotation on
the final settlement day of VIX options and futures which have the
expiration that contribute to the VIX settlement calculation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes to amend the Fees Schedule with respect
to the Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') Orders Rate Table. By way
of background, the Fees Schedule currently provides for a ``QCC Rate
Table'' which sets forth a transaction fee and credit for QCC
transactions. In addition, the ``Notes'' section of the QCC Rate Table
includes the definition of a QCC transaction. Specifically the
``Notes'' section currently provides that ``A QCC transaction is
comprised of an `initiating order' to buy (sell) at least 1,000
contracts, coupled with a contra-side order to sell (buy) an equal
number of contracts . . .'' The Exchange notes that it recently amended
its QCC rules to expand the availability of QCC orders
[[Page 77071]]
by permitting multiple contra-parties on a QCC order.\5\ As such, the
definition of QCC Orders in CBOE Rule 6.53 has been amended. The
Exchange proposes to similarly amend the Fees Schedule to incorporate
this new definition to maintain consistency in the Rules and Fees
Schedule and avoid potential confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75756 (August 25,
2015), 80 FR 168 (August 31, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-073).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\6\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \7\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitation
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. The Exchange
also believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\8\ which provides that Exchange rules may provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its Trading Permit Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the SPXW and VIX Customer Priority
Surcharge increases are reasonable because the amount of the new fees
are within the range of surcharges assessed for customer transactions
in other CBOE proprietary products (for example customers are currently
assessed a $0.20 Hybrid 3.0 Execution Surcharge (which essentially acts
as a customer priority surcharge) in SPX options).
The Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess the SPXW and VIX Priority Surcharges to
Customers and not other market participants because Customers are not
subject to additional costs for effecting transactions in SPXW and VIX
which are applicable to other market participants, such as license
surcharges. Additionally, Customers are not subject to fees applicable
to other market participants such as connectivity fees and fees
relating to Trading Permits, and are not subject to the same
obligations as other market participants, including regulatory and
compliance requirements and quoting obligations.
The Exchange notes that the VIX Surcharge was adopted to minimize
the cost differentials between manual and electronic executions (as
Floor Brokers assess a commission on customer executions). As such, the
Exchange believes it's equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
assess the VIX Surcharge to Makers and not Takers because electronic
Maker orders are analogous to customer orders represented by Floor
Brokers in open outcry (as compared to Takers that immediately remove
liquidity and do not rest in the book). The Exchange believes it's
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to assess only Makers in VIX
and both Makers and Takers in SPXW because the SPX product group has
reached a mature and established level since its introduction while VIX
has not and the Exchange therefore wants to incentivize liquidity in
VIX and not discourage trading. The Exchange also notes that another
S&P 500 product (SPX) also charges a surcharge to both Makers and
Takers (i.e., the Hybrid 3.0 Surcharge). The Exchange believes that it
is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to only assess the VIX
Surcharge to Maker Non-Turners because the Exchange wants to encourage
improving the market (``turning'').
The Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to only assess the VIX Surcharge when the contract
premium is at least $0.11 because the Exchange wants to reduce costs on
low priced VIX options to encourage Customers to close and roll over
positions close to expiration at low premium levels. Currently, such
Customers are less likely to do this because the transaction fee is
closer to the premium level. The Exchange believes that maintaining
lowered fees overall for VIX options trading with a premium of $0.00-
$0.10 will encourage the trading of such options. As such, the Exchange
does not wish to assess the VIX Surcharge on such options in order to
keep the costs low.
Finally, the Exchange believes that codifying the amended
definition of a QCC transaction in the Fees Schedule (in addition to
the Exchange's Rules, where it is currently provided for), will
alleviate potential confusion and maintain clarity in the Fees
Schedule, which serves 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.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because, while different
electronic transaction fees are assessed to different market
participants, different market participants have different obligations
and circumstances as noted above. The Exchange believes that the
proposal to increase the surcharge amount assessed to Customers for
executions in SPXW and VIX contracts will not cause an unnecessary
burden on intermarket competition because SPXW and VIX are only traded
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.
Additionally, the proposed change to codify in the Fees Schedule
the revised definition of a QCC order is not intended for competitive
reasons and only applies to CBOE. The Exchange notes that no rights or
obligations of Trading Permit Holders are affected by this particular
change.
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 \9\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \10\
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
[[Page 77072]]
change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\10\ 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-2015-109 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-2015-109. 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 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-CBOE-2015-109, and should be
submitted on or before January 4, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-31178 Filed 12-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P