Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Qualified Contingent Cross Pricing, 25457-25460 [2016-09898]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 82 / Thursday, April 28, 2016 / Notices
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
[Release No. 34–77690; File No. SR–Phlx–
2016–52]
The Exchange proposes to amend the
Exchange’s Pricing Schedule at Section
II, entitled ‘‘Multiply Listed Options
Fees.’’ Specifically, the Exchange is
proposing to amend the Qualified
Contingent Cross (‘‘QCC’’) pricing.
While changes to the Pricing
Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has
designated these changes to be operative
on May 2, 2016.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s Web site
at https://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.
com/, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission’s
Public Reference Room.
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change to Qualified
Contingent Cross Pricing
April 22, 2016.
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 April 15,
2016, NASDAQ PHLX LLC (‘‘Phlx’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or
‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III, below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
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
25457
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 purpose of the proposed rule
change is to amend the Exchange’s
Pricing Schedule at Section II, entitled
‘‘Multiply Listed Options Fees.’’
Specifically, the Exchange is proposing
to amend QCC pricing.
Today, the Exchange assesses a QCC
Transaction Fee of $0.20 per contract to
a Specialist,3 Market Maker,4 Firm 5 and
Broker-Dealer.6 Customers 7 and
Professionals 8 are not assessed a QCC
Transaction Fee. The Exchange also
pays rebates on QCC Orders as follows:
QCC REBATE SCHEDULE
Tier
Tier
Tier
Tier
Tier
Tier
Tier
1
2
3
4
5
6
............
............
............
............
............
............
0 to 99,999 contracts in a month ..............................................................................................................................
100,000 to 299,999 contracts in a month .................................................................................................................
300,000 to 499,999 contracts in a month .................................................................................................................
500,000 to 699,999 contracts in a month .................................................................................................................
700,000 to 999,999 contracts in a month .................................................................................................................
Over 1,000,000 contracts in a month .......................................................................................................................
Rebates are paid for all qualifying
executed QCC Orders, as defined in
Rule 1080(o) 9 and Floor QCC Orders, as
defined in Rule 1064(e),10 except where
the transaction is either: (i) Customer-toCustomer; (ii) Customer-to-Professional
or (iii) a dividend, merger, short stock
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 A ‘‘Specialist’’ is an Exchange member who is
registered as an options specialist pursuant to Rule
1020(a).
4 The term ‘‘Market Maker’’ includes Registered
Options Traders (‘‘ROT’’). See Exchange Rule
1014(b)(i) and (ii). A ROT includes a Streaming
Quote Trader or ‘‘SQT,’’ a Remote Streaming Quote
Trader or ‘‘RSQT’’ and a Non-SQT, which by
definition is neither a SQT nor a RSQT. A ROT is
defined in Exchange Rule 1014(b) as a regular
member or a foreign currency options participant of
the Exchange located on the trading floor who has
received permission from the Exchange to trade in
options for his own account. An SQT is an ROT
who has received permission from the Exchange to
generate and submit option quotations
electronically in options to which such SQT is
assigned. See Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A). An RSQT is an
ROT that is a member affiliated with and Remote
Streaming Quote Organization with no physical
trading floor presence who has received permission
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
2 17
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Rebate per
contract
Threshold
22:09 Apr 27, 2016
Jkt 238001
$0.00
0.05
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.11
interest or reversal or conversion
strategy execution.11 The maximum
QCC Rebate to be paid in a given month
will not exceed $450,000.12 The
Exchange pays QCC Rebates to market
participants acting as agent on
qualifying QCC Orders per the QCC
Rebate Schedule. The Exchange
proposes to no longer pay QCC Rebates
on Professional-to-Professional orders.
QCC Orders are an order to buy or sell
at least 1,000 contracts, or 10,000
contracts in the case of Mini Options.13
These large-sized contingent orders are
from the Exchange to generate and submit option
quotations electronically in options to which such
RSQT has been assigned. See Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B).
5 The term ‘‘Firm’’ applies to any transaction that
is identified by a member or member organization
for clearing in the Firm range at The Options
Clearing Corporation.
6 The term ‘‘Broker-Dealer’’ applies to any
transaction which is not subject to any of the other
transaction fees applicable within a particular
category.
7 The term ‘‘Customer’’ applies to any transaction
that is identified by a member or member
organization for clearing in the Customer range at
The Options Clearing Corporation which is not for
the account of a broker or dealer or for the account
of a ‘‘Professional’’ (as that term is defined in Rule
1000(b)(14)).
8 The term ‘‘Professional’’ means any person or
entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities,
and (ii) places more than 390 orders in listed
options per day on average during a calendar month
for its own beneficial account(s). See Rule
1000(b)(14).
9 A QCC Order is comprised of an originating
order to buy or sell at least 1,000 contracts, or
10,000 contracts in the case of Mini Options, that
is identified as being part of a qualified contingent
trade, as that term is defined in Rule 1080(o)(3),
coupled with a contra-side order or orders totaling
an equal number of contracts. See Rule 1080(o).
10 A Floor QCC Order must: (i) Be for at least
1,000 contracts; (ii) meet the six requirements of
Rule 1080(o)(3) which are modeled on the QCT
Exemption; (iii) be executed at a price at or between
the National Best Bid and Offer (‘‘NBBO’’); and (iv)
be rejected if a Customer order is resting on the
Exchange book at the same price. In order to satisfy
the 1,000-contract requirement, a Floor QCC Order
must be for 1,000 contracts and could not be, for
example, two 500-contract orders or two 500contract legs.
11 See Section II of the Pricing Schedule.
12 Id.
13 See notes 9 and 10 above.
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\28APN1.SGM
28APN1
25458
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 82 / Thursday, April 28, 2016 / Notices
complex in nature and have a stock-tied
component, which requires the option
leg to be executed at the NBBO or better.
The parties to a contingent trade are
focused on the spread or ratio between
the transaction prices for each of the
component instruments (i.e., the net
price of the entire contingent trade),
rather than on the absolute price of any
single component. Today, Professional
orders are treated similar to Customer
orders with respect to QCC pricing
because of the characteristics of the QCC
Order which are described above.
Today, Professional orders are not
assessed a QCC Transaction Fee and no
rebate is paid for Customer-toProfessional orders. The Exchange
reasoned in a prior rule change 14 that
‘‘The differentiation between a
Customer and Professional is not
necessary with respect to QCC Orders
because these orders are exempt from
requirements regarding order
exposure.15 Further, QCC Orders are not
executed pursuant to a priority
scheme.16 Also, as explained above,
because of the size of the order,
sophistication of the investor and
complexity of the transaction, it is
difficult to distinguish as between a
Customer and Professional with respect
to QCC Orders.’’ 17
The Exchange believes that treating
Customer orders and Professional orders
in a similar manner by also excluding
Professional-to-Professional orders as
eligible to receive a QCC Rebate will
further remove any differentiation as
between Professionals and Customers
with respect to QCC pricing when
transacting QCC Orders.
2. Statutory Basis
The proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act,18 in general, and
furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,19 in
particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among members
and issuers and other persons using any
facility or system which the Exchange
operates or controls, and is not designed
to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The Commission and the courts have
repeatedly expressed their preference
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
14 See
SR–Phlx–2016–51 (not yet published).
Rule 1080(c)(ii)(C).
16 By way of comparison, Customers receive
priority over other market participants with respect
to the execution of their order within the
Exchange’s order book or on the Floor.
17 A Professional QCC Order would count toward
the 390 orders in listed options per day. See note
8 above.
18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
15 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:09 Apr 27, 2016
Jkt 238001
for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities
markets. In Regulation NMS, while
adopting a series of steps to improve the
current market model, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO
revenues and, also, recognized that
current regulation of the market system
‘‘has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its
broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.’’ 20
Likewise, in NetCoalition v. Securities
and Exchange Commission 21 the D.C.
Circuit upheld the Commission’s use of
a market-based approach in evaluating
the fairness of market data fees against
a challenge claiming that Congress
mandated a cost-based approach.22 As
the court emphasized, the Commission
‘‘intended in Regulation NMS that
‘market forces, rather than regulatory
requirements’ play a role in determining
the market data . . . to be made
available to investors and at what
cost.’’ 23
Further, ‘‘[n]o one disputes that
competition for order flow is ‘fierce.’
. . . As the SEC explained, ‘[i]n the U.S.
national market system, buyers and
sellers of securities, and the brokerdealers that act as their order-routing
agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution’;
[and] ‘no exchange can afford to take its
market share percentages for granted’
because ‘no exchange possesses a
monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in
the execution of order flow from broker
dealers’ . . . .’’ 24 Although the court
and the SEC were discussing the cash
equities markets, the Exchange believes
that these views apply with equal force
to the options markets.
It is reasonable to no longer pay a
QCC Rebate on Professional-toProfessional orders because the
distinction that necessitated the
differentiation as between Customer and
Professional orders is not meaningful
with respect to QCC Orders. QCC Orders
are orders to buy or sell at least 1,000
contracts, or 10,000 contracts in the case
20 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37497, 37499 (June 29, 2005)
(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’) [sic].
21 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005) [sic] at 534–535.
22 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005) [sic] at 534.
23 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005) [sic] at 537.
24 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005) [sic] at 539 (quoting Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782–83 (December 9, 2008)
(SR–NYSEArca–2006–21).
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
of Mini Options.25 These large-sized
contingent orders are complex in nature
and have a stock-tied component, which
requires the option leg to be executed at
the NBBO or better. The parties to a
contingent trade are focused on the
spread or ratio between the transaction
prices for each of the component
instruments (i.e., the net price of the
entire contingent trade), rather than on
the absolute price of any single
component. Also, no Customer priority
exists with respect to QCC Orders as
with orders transacted within the order
book or on the Floor. Today,
Professional orders are not assessed a
QCC Transaction Fee and are not
eligible to receive a QCC Rebate for
Customer-to-Professional orders. The
Exchange believes that also excluding
Professional-to-Professional orders from
receiving a QCC Rebate will align
Customer orders and Professional
orders 26 with respect to QCC Pricing.
With respect to QCC transactions, the
Commission noted in an order
approving a qualified contingent cross
order type on International Securities
Exchange, LLC (‘‘ISE’’) that ‘‘The
Commission believes that those
customers participating in QCC Orders
will likely be sophisticated investors
who should understand that, without a
requirement of exposure for QCC
Orders, their order would not be given
an opportunity for price improvement
on the Exchange. These customers
should be able to assess whether the net
prices they are receiving for their QCC
Order are competitive, and who will
have the ability to choose among brokerdealers if they believe the net price one
broker-dealer provides is not
competitive. Further, broker-dealers are
subject to a duty of best execution for
their customers’ orders, and that duty
does not change for QCC Orders.’’ 27 The
intent behind the Professional
designation does not apply in the
context of transacting QCC Orders,
because of the size of the order,
sophistication of the investor and
complexity of the transaction, and
therefore the pricing differentiation is
not necessary. For these reasons, the
Exchange believes that also excepting
Professional-to-Professional orders from
receiving a QCC Rebate will further
remove any differentiation as between
Professionals and Customers with
respect to QCC pricing when transacting
QCC Orders.
25 See
notes 9 and 10 above.
26 Professional-to-Customer
orders are currently
excluded from the QCC Rebate.
27 See Securities and Exchange Act Release No.
63955 (February 24, 2011), 76 FR 11533 (March 2,
2011) (SR–ISE–2010–73).
E:\FR\FM\28APN1.SGM
28APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 82 / Thursday, April 28, 2016 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
It is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to no longer pay a QCC
Rebate on Professional-to-Professional
orders because, today, Professionals are
not assessed a QCC Transaction Fee and
Customer-to-Professional orders are not
eligible to receive a QCC Rebate.
Excluding Professional-to-Professional
orders from receiving a QCC Rebate
aligns the treatment of Professional
orders with Customer orders. As
explained above, QCC Orders are
distinctive as compared to transactions
executed within the order book or on
the Floor, which orders are subject to
exposure and grant Customers priority
over other market participants. The
original purpose for the distinction
between a Customer and a Professional
was to prevent market professionals 28
with access to sophisticated trading
systems that contain functionality not
available to retail Customers, from
taking advantage of Customer priority,
where Customer orders are given
execution priority over non-Customer
orders. The Exchange noted at the time
that it adopted the Professional
designation that basing the Professional
designation upon the average number of
orders entered for a beneficial account
was an appropriate objective approach
that would reasonably distinguish such
persons and entities from retail
investors.29
With respect to distinguishing
Professional orders from other NonCustomer participant orders, the
Exchange notes that these other market
participants, Specialists, Market Makers,
Firms and Broker-Dealers, are distinct
from a Professional for purposes of
assessing QCC Transaction fees for the
below reasons. With respect to Firms,
these market participants are eligible for
the Monthly Firm Fee Cap of $75,000
per month.30 Firms are not subject to
QCC Transaction Fees once the Monthly
Firm Fee Cap is met in a given month.
Specialists and Market Makers are
eligible for the Monthly Market Maker
28 The Exchange noted in its filing that market
professionals have access to functionality,
including things such as continuously updated
pricing models based upon real-time streaming
data, access to multiple markets simultaneously and
order and risk management tools. See Securities
and Exchange Act Release No. 61426 (January 26,
2010), 75 FR 5360 (February 2, 2010) (SR–Phlx–
2010–05).
29 See Securities and Exchange Act Release No.
61426 (January 26, 2010), 75 FR 5360 (February 2,
2010) (SR–Phlx–2010–05).
30 Firms are subject to a maximum fee of $75,000
(‘‘Monthly Firm Fee Cap’’). Firm Floor Option
Transaction Charges and QCC Transaction Fees, in
the aggregate, for one billing month will not exceed
the Monthly Firm Fee Cap per member organization
when such members are trading in their own
proprietary account. See Section II of the Pricing
Schedule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:09 Apr 27, 2016
Jkt 238001
Cap of $500,000 per month.31
Specialists and Market Makers are not
subject to QCC Transaction Fees once
the Monthly Market Maker Cap is met
in a given month. Professionals are not
subject to similar caps. With respect to
Broker-Dealers, the Exchange notes that
members may choose to register as a
Broker-Dealer. Market participants
acting as agent, compared to market
participants trading for their own
account, are eligible to receive QCC
Rebates. The Exchange pays market
participants acting as agent for QCC
Orders the QCC Rebates per the QCC
Rebate Schedule.32
Further, the Exchange believes that
distinguishing Professional orders from
other Non-Customer orders is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because
QCC Orders are an exception to the
general distinctions drawn as between
Customer orders and Professional
orders. Aside from the lack of priority
for QCC Orders, the size of the order,
sophistication of the investor and
complexity of the transaction make it
difficult to distinguish a Customer order
from a Professional order. For purposes
of the QCC Order, the Exchange believes
that such distinction is not necessary.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. In terms of
inter-market competition, the Exchange
notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market
participants can readily favor competing
venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive, or
rebate opportunities available at other
venues to be more favorable. In such an
environment, the Exchange must
continually adjust its fees to remain
competitive with other exchanges and
with alternative trading systems that
have been exempted from compliance
with the statutory standards applicable
to exchanges. Because competitors are
31 Specialists and Market Makers are subject to a
‘‘Monthly Market Maker Cap’’ of $500,000 for: (i)
Electronic Option Transaction Charges; and (ii)
QCC Transaction Fees (as defined in Exchange Rule
1080(o) and Floor QCC Orders, as defined in
1064(e)). The trading activity of separate Specialist
and Market Maker member organizations will be
aggregated in calculating the Monthly Market Maker
Cap if there is Common Ownership between the
member organizations. See Section II of the Pricing
Schedule.
32 QCC Rebates are paid by volume. There are
currently six tiers which pay a QCR Rebate between
$0.00 and $0.11 per contract. See Section II of the
Pricing Schedule. Of note, Firms may transact QCC
Orders on an agency basis and be eligible for a QCC
Rebate.
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25459
free to modify their own fees in
response, and because market
participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, that the degree
to which fee changes in this market may
impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited.
The initial purpose of the distinction
between a Customer and a Professional
was to prevent market professionals
with access to sophisticated trading
systems that contain functionality not
available to retail customers, from
taking advantage of Customer priority,
where Customer orders are given
execution priority over Non-Customer
orders. Professional orders are identified
based upon the average number of
orders entered for a beneficial
account.33
QCC Orders are by definition largesized contingent orders which have a
stock-tied component. The parties to a
contingent trade are focused on the
spread or ratio between the transaction
prices for each of the component
instruments (i.e., the net price of the
entire contingent trade), rather than on
the absolute price of any single
component. Treating Customer orders
and Professional orders in the same
manner in terms of pricing with respect
to QCC Orders does not provide any
advantage to a Professional. The
distinction does not create an
opportunity to burden competition, for
the reasons stated herein with respect to
priority as well as the reasons below.
With respect to distinguishing
Professional orders from other NonCustomer orders, the Exchange notes
that Non-Customer orders are distinct
from Professional orders for purposes of
assessing QCC Transaction Fees. Firms
are eligible for the Monthly Firm Fee
Cap and not subject to QCC Transaction
Fees once the Monthly Firm Fee Cap is
met in a given month.34 Specialists and
Market Makers are eligible for the
Monthly Market Maker Cap and not
subject to QCC Transaction Fees once
the Monthly Market Maker Cap is met
in a given month.35 Professionals are not
subject to similar caps. With respect to
Broker-Dealers, the Exchange notes that
members may choose to register as a
Broker-Dealer. These categories of
market participants transact QCC Orders
on an agency basis and are eligible to
receive QCC Rebates. Excluding
Professional-to-Professional orders does
not impose an undue burden on intramarket competition because excluding
33 See
note 8.
acting as agents would be eligible to
receive a QCC Rebate.
35 Specialists and Market Makers trade only for
their own account.
34 Firms
E:\FR\FM\28APN1.SGM
28APN1
25460
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 82 / Thursday, April 28, 2016 / Notices
these types of orders would further align
the exclusion of Professional-toProfessional orders with the exclusion
of Customer-to-Customer and Customerto-Professional orders from receiving a
QCC Rebate.
The Exchange’s proposal does not
place on undue burden on inter-market
competition because the QCC order type
is similar on other options exchanges 36
and these exchanges may also file to
eliminate the distinction between
Customers and Professionals for the
QCC order type.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either
solicited or received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.37
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: (i) Necessary or appropriate in
the public interest; (ii) for the protection
of investors; or (iii) otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
should be approved or disapproved.
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:
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
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–
Phlx–2016–52 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.
36 See Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated’s Fees Schedule and Miami
International Securities Exchange LLC’s Pricing
Schedule.
37 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:09 Apr 27, 2016
Jkt 238001
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–Phlx–2016–52. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all
subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed
rule change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–Phlx–2016–52 and should
be submitted on or before May 19, 2016.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.38
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016–09898 Filed 4–27–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–77694; File No. SR–BOX–
2016–17]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX
Options Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the Fee Schedule on the BOX Market
LLC (‘‘BOX’’) Options Facility
April 22, 2106.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on April 12,
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
2016, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange filed the proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the
Act,3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,4
which renders the proposal effective
upon filing with the Commission. 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 is filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) a proposed rule change
to amend the Fee Schedule to amend
the BOX Volume Rebate (‘‘BVR’’) in
Section I.B.2 of the Fee Schedule on the
BOX Market LLC (‘‘BOX’’) options
facility. While changes to the fee
schedule pursuant to this proposal will
be effective upon filing, the changes will
become operative on April 13, 2016.
The text of the proposed rule change is
available from the principal office of the
Exchange, at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room and also on the
Exchange’s Internet Web site at https://
boxexchange.com.
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 the
Fee Schedule for trading on BOX.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
amend the BOX Volume Rebate (‘‘BVR’’)
in Section I.B.2 of the Fee Schedule.
Under the current BVR, the Exchange
offers a tiered per contract rebate for all
38 17
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3 15
4 17
E:\FR\FM\28APN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
28APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 82 (Thursday, April 28, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25457-25460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09898]
[[Page 25457]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-77690; File No. SR-Phlx-2016-52]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Qualified
Contingent Cross Pricing
April 22, 2016.
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 April 15, 2016, NASDAQ PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below,
which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Pricing Schedule at
Section II, entitled ``Multiply Listed Options Fees.'' Specifically,
the Exchange is proposing to amend the Qualified Contingent Cross
(``QCC'') pricing.
While changes to the Pricing Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be
operative on May 2, 2016.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at https://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change 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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's
Pricing Schedule at Section II, entitled ``Multiply Listed Options
Fees.'' Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to amend QCC pricing.
Today, the Exchange assesses a QCC Transaction Fee of $0.20 per
contract to a Specialist,\3\ Market Maker,\4\ Firm \5\ and Broker-
Dealer.\6\ Customers \7\ and Professionals \8\ are not assessed a QCC
Transaction Fee. The Exchange also pays rebates on QCC Orders as
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ A ``Specialist'' is an Exchange member who is registered as
an options specialist pursuant to Rule 1020(a).
\4\ The term ``Market Maker'' includes Registered Options
Traders (``ROT''). See Exchange Rule 1014(b)(i) and (ii). A ROT
includes a Streaming Quote Trader or ``SQT,'' a Remote Streaming
Quote Trader or ``RSQT'' and a Non-SQT, which by definition is
neither a SQT nor a RSQT. A ROT is defined in Exchange Rule 1014(b)
as a regular member or a foreign currency options participant of the
Exchange located on the trading floor who has received permission
from the Exchange to trade in options for his own account. An SQT is
an ROT who has received permission from the Exchange to generate and
submit option quotations electronically in options to which such SQT
is assigned. See Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A). An RSQT is an ROT that is a
member affiliated with and Remote Streaming Quote Organization with
no physical trading floor presence who has received permission from
the Exchange to generate and submit option quotations electronically
in options to which such RSQT has been assigned. See Rule
1014(b)(ii)(B).
\5\ The term ``Firm'' applies to any transaction that is
identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the
Firm range at The Options Clearing Corporation.
\6\ The term ``Broker-Dealer'' applies to any transaction which
is not subject to any of the other transaction fees applicable
within a particular category.
\7\ The term ``Customer'' applies to any transaction that is
identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the
Customer range at The Options Clearing Corporation which is not for
the account of a broker or dealer or for the account of a
``Professional'' (as that term is defined in Rule 1000(b)(14)).
\8\ The term ``Professional'' means any person or entity that
(i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) places more
than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). See Rule
1000(b)(14).
QCC Rebate Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rebate per
Tier Threshold contract
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1................... 0 to 99,999 contracts in a $0.00
month.
Tier 2................... 100,000 to 299,999 contracts 0.05
in a month.
Tier 3................... 300,000 to 499,999 contracts 0.07
in a month.
Tier 4................... 500,000 to 699,999 contracts 0.08
in a month.
Tier 5................... 700,000 to 999,999 contracts 0.09
in a month.
Tier 6................... Over 1,000,000 contracts in a 0.11
month.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rebates are paid for all qualifying executed QCC Orders, as defined
in Rule 1080(o) \9\ and Floor QCC Orders, as defined in Rule
1064(e),\10\ except where the transaction is either: (i) Customer-to-
Customer; (ii) Customer-to-Professional or (iii) a dividend, merger,
short stock interest or reversal or conversion strategy execution.\11\
The maximum QCC Rebate to be paid in a given month will not exceed
$450,000.\12\ The Exchange pays QCC Rebates to market participants
acting as agent on qualifying QCC Orders per the QCC Rebate Schedule.
The Exchange proposes to no longer pay QCC Rebates on Professional-to-
Professional orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ A QCC Order is comprised of an originating order to buy or
sell at least 1,000 contracts, or 10,000 contracts in the case of
Mini Options, that is identified as being part of a qualified
contingent trade, as that term is defined in Rule 1080(o)(3),
coupled with a contra-side order or orders totaling an equal number
of contracts. See Rule 1080(o).
\10\ A Floor QCC Order must: (i) Be for at least 1,000
contracts; (ii) meet the six requirements of Rule 1080(o)(3) which
are modeled on the QCT Exemption; (iii) be executed at a price at or
between the National Best Bid and Offer (``NBBO''); and (iv) be
rejected if a Customer order is resting on the Exchange book at the
same price. In order to satisfy the 1,000-contract requirement, a
Floor QCC Order must be for 1,000 contracts and could not be, for
example, two 500-contract orders or two 500-contract legs.
\11\ See Section II of the Pricing Schedule.
\12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
QCC Orders are an order to buy or sell at least 1,000 contracts, or
10,000 contracts in the case of Mini Options.\13\ These large-sized
contingent orders are
[[Page 25458]]
complex in nature and have a stock-tied component, which requires the
option leg to be executed at the NBBO or better. The parties to a
contingent trade are focused on the spread or ratio between the
transaction prices for each of the component instruments (i.e., the net
price of the entire contingent trade), rather than on the absolute
price of any single component. Today, Professional orders are treated
similar to Customer orders with respect to QCC pricing because of the
characteristics of the QCC Order which are described above. Today,
Professional orders are not assessed a QCC Transaction Fee and no
rebate is paid for Customer-to-Professional orders. The Exchange
reasoned in a prior rule change \14\ that ``The differentiation between
a Customer and Professional is not necessary with respect to QCC Orders
because these orders are exempt from requirements regarding order
exposure.\15\ Further, QCC Orders are not executed pursuant to a
priority scheme.\16\ Also, as explained above, because of the size of
the order, sophistication of the investor and complexity of the
transaction, it is difficult to distinguish as between a Customer and
Professional with respect to QCC Orders.'' \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See notes 9 and 10 above.
\14\ See SR-Phlx-2016-51 (not yet published).
\15\ See Rule 1080(c)(ii)(C).
\16\ By way of comparison, Customers receive priority over other
market participants with respect to the execution of their order
within the Exchange's order book or on the Floor.
\17\ A Professional QCC Order would count toward the 390 orders
in listed options per day. See note 8 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that treating Customer orders and
Professional orders in a similar manner by also excluding Professional-
to-Professional orders as eligible to receive a QCC Rebate will further
remove any differentiation as between Professionals and Customers with
respect to QCC pricing when transacting QCC Orders.
2. Statutory Basis
The proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,\18\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of
the Act,\19\ in particular, in that it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and
issuers and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls, and is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation
NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market
model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37497, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'') [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Likewise, in NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission
\21\ the D.C. Circuit upheld the Commission's use of a market-based
approach in evaluating the fairness of market data fees against a
challenge claiming that Congress mandated a cost-based approach.\22\ As
the court emphasized, the Commission ``intended in Regulation NMS that
`market forces, rather than regulatory requirements' play a role in
determining the market data . . . to be made available to investors and
at what cost.'' \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005) [sic] at 534-535.
\22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005) [sic] at 534.
\23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005) [sic] at 537.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is
`fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of
order flow from broker dealers' . . . .'' \24\ Although the court and
the SEC were discussing the cash equities markets, the Exchange
believes that these views apply with equal force to the options
markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005) [sic] at 539 (quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008)
(SR-NYSEArca-2006-21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is reasonable to no longer pay a QCC Rebate on Professional-to-
Professional orders because the distinction that necessitated the
differentiation as between Customer and Professional orders is not
meaningful with respect to QCC Orders. QCC Orders are orders to buy or
sell at least 1,000 contracts, or 10,000 contracts in the case of Mini
Options.\25\ These large-sized contingent orders are complex in nature
and have a stock-tied component, which requires the option leg to be
executed at the NBBO or better. The parties to a contingent trade are
focused on the spread or ratio between the transaction prices for each
of the component instruments (i.e., the net price of the entire
contingent trade), rather than on the absolute price of any single
component. Also, no Customer priority exists with respect to QCC Orders
as with orders transacted within the order book or on the Floor. Today,
Professional orders are not assessed a QCC Transaction Fee and are not
eligible to receive a QCC Rebate for Customer-to-Professional orders.
The Exchange believes that also excluding Professional-to-Professional
orders from receiving a QCC Rebate will align Customer orders and
Professional orders \26\ with respect to QCC Pricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See notes 9 and 10 above.
\26\ Professional-to-Customer orders are currently excluded from
the QCC Rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to QCC transactions, the Commission noted in an order
approving a qualified contingent cross order type on International
Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'') that ``The Commission believes that
those customers participating in QCC Orders will likely be
sophisticated investors who should understand that, without a
requirement of exposure for QCC Orders, their order would not be given
an opportunity for price improvement on the Exchange. These customers
should be able to assess whether the net prices they are receiving for
their QCC Order are competitive, and who will have the ability to
choose among broker-dealers if they believe the net price one broker-
dealer provides is not competitive. Further, broker-dealers are subject
to a duty of best execution for their customers' orders, and that duty
does not change for QCC Orders.'' \27\ The intent behind the
Professional designation does not apply in the context of transacting
QCC Orders, because of the size of the order, sophistication of the
investor and complexity of the transaction, and therefore the pricing
differentiation is not necessary. For these reasons, the Exchange
believes that also excepting Professional-to-Professional orders from
receiving a QCC Rebate will further remove any differentiation as
between Professionals and Customers with respect to QCC pricing when
transacting QCC Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 63955 (February
24, 2011), 76 FR 11533 (March 2, 2011) (SR-ISE-2010-73).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 25459]]
It is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to no longer pay a
QCC Rebate on Professional-to-Professional orders because, today,
Professionals are not assessed a QCC Transaction Fee and Customer-to-
Professional orders are not eligible to receive a QCC Rebate. Excluding
Professional-to-Professional orders from receiving a QCC Rebate aligns
the treatment of Professional orders with Customer orders. As explained
above, QCC Orders are distinctive as compared to transactions executed
within the order book or on the Floor, which orders are subject to
exposure and grant Customers priority over other market participants.
The original purpose for the distinction between a Customer and a
Professional was to prevent market professionals \28\ with access to
sophisticated trading systems that contain functionality not available
to retail Customers, from taking advantage of Customer priority, where
Customer orders are given execution priority over non-Customer orders.
The Exchange noted at the time that it adopted the Professional
designation that basing the Professional designation upon the average
number of orders entered for a beneficial account was an appropriate
objective approach that would reasonably distinguish such persons and
entities from retail investors.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The Exchange noted in its filing that market professionals
have access to functionality, including things such as continuously
updated pricing models based upon real-time streaming data, access
to multiple markets simultaneously and order and risk management
tools. See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 61426 (January
26, 2010), 75 FR 5360 (February 2, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-05).
\29\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 61426 (January
26, 2010), 75 FR 5360 (February 2, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to distinguishing Professional orders from other Non-
Customer participant orders, the Exchange notes that these other market
participants, Specialists, Market Makers, Firms and Broker-Dealers, are
distinct from a Professional for purposes of assessing QCC Transaction
fees for the below reasons. With respect to Firms, these market
participants are eligible for the Monthly Firm Fee Cap of $75,000 per
month.\30\ Firms are not subject to QCC Transaction Fees once the
Monthly Firm Fee Cap is met in a given month. Specialists and Market
Makers are eligible for the Monthly Market Maker Cap of $500,000 per
month.\31\ Specialists and Market Makers are not subject to QCC
Transaction Fees once the Monthly Market Maker Cap is met in a given
month. Professionals are not subject to similar caps. With respect to
Broker-Dealers, the Exchange notes that members may choose to register
as a Broker-Dealer. Market participants acting as agent, compared to
market participants trading for their own account, are eligible to
receive QCC Rebates. The Exchange pays market participants acting as
agent for QCC Orders the QCC Rebates per the QCC Rebate Schedule.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Firms are subject to a maximum fee of $75,000 (``Monthly
Firm Fee Cap''). Firm Floor Option Transaction Charges and QCC
Transaction Fees, in the aggregate, for one billing month will not
exceed the Monthly Firm Fee Cap per member organization when such
members are trading in their own proprietary account. See Section II
of the Pricing Schedule.
\31\ Specialists and Market Makers are subject to a ``Monthly
Market Maker Cap'' of $500,000 for: (i) Electronic Option
Transaction Charges; and (ii) QCC Transaction Fees (as defined in
Exchange Rule 1080(o) and Floor QCC Orders, as defined in 1064(e)).
The trading activity of separate Specialist and Market Maker member
organizations will be aggregated in calculating the Monthly Market
Maker Cap if there is Common Ownership between the member
organizations. See Section II of the Pricing Schedule.
\32\ QCC Rebates are paid by volume. There are currently six
tiers which pay a QCR Rebate between $0.00 and $0.11 per contract.
See Section II of the Pricing Schedule. Of note, Firms may transact
QCC Orders on an agency basis and be eligible for a QCC Rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, the Exchange believes that distinguishing Professional
orders from other Non-Customer orders is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because QCC Orders are an exception to the general
distinctions drawn as between Customer orders and Professional orders.
Aside from the lack of priority for QCC Orders, the size of the order,
sophistication of the investor and complexity of the transaction make
it difficult to distinguish a Customer order from a Professional order.
For purposes of the QCC Order, the Exchange believes that such
distinction is not necessary.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In terms of inter-market
competition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive, or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more
favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust
its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges and with
alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance
with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because
competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and because
market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices,
that the degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any
burden on competition is extremely limited.
The initial purpose of the distinction between a Customer and a
Professional was to prevent market professionals with access to
sophisticated trading systems that contain functionality not available
to retail customers, from taking advantage of Customer priority, where
Customer orders are given execution priority over Non-Customer orders.
Professional orders are identified based upon the average number of
orders entered for a beneficial account.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
QCC Orders are by definition large-sized contingent orders which
have a stock-tied component. The parties to a contingent trade are
focused on the spread or ratio between the transaction prices for each
of the component instruments (i.e., the net price of the entire
contingent trade), rather than on the absolute price of any single
component. Treating Customer orders and Professional orders in the same
manner in terms of pricing with respect to QCC Orders does not provide
any advantage to a Professional. The distinction does not create an
opportunity to burden competition, for the reasons stated herein with
respect to priority as well as the reasons below.
With respect to distinguishing Professional orders from other Non-
Customer orders, the Exchange notes that Non-Customer orders are
distinct from Professional orders for purposes of assessing QCC
Transaction Fees. Firms are eligible for the Monthly Firm Fee Cap and
not subject to QCC Transaction Fees once the Monthly Firm Fee Cap is
met in a given month.\34\ Specialists and Market Makers are eligible
for the Monthly Market Maker Cap and not subject to QCC Transaction
Fees once the Monthly Market Maker Cap is met in a given month.\35\
Professionals are not subject to similar caps. With respect to Broker-
Dealers, the Exchange notes that members may choose to register as a
Broker-Dealer. These categories of market participants transact QCC
Orders on an agency basis and are eligible to receive QCC Rebates.
Excluding Professional-to-Professional orders does not impose an undue
burden on intra-market competition because excluding
[[Page 25460]]
these types of orders would further align the exclusion of
Professional-to-Professional orders with the exclusion of Customer-to-
Customer and Customer-to-Professional orders from receiving a QCC
Rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Firms acting as agents would be eligible to receive a QCC
Rebate.
\35\ Specialists and Market Makers trade only for their own
account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal does not place on undue burden on inter-
market competition because the QCC order type is similar on other
options exchanges \36\ and these exchanges may also file to eliminate
the distinction between Customers and Professionals for the QCC order
type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated's Fees
Schedule and Miami International Securities Exchange LLC's Pricing
Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either solicited or received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
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-Phlx-2016-52 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-Phlx-2016-52. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2016-52 and
should be submitted on or before May 19, 2016.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-09898 Filed 4-27-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P