Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule With Respect to the Options Regulatory Fee, 15437-15439 [2018-07244]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2018 / Notices
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Electronic Comments
[Release No. 34–82993; File No. SR–
NYSEArca–2018–19]
• 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–
ISE–2018–24 on the subject line.
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Arca
Options Fee Schedule With Respect to
the Options Regulatory Fee
Paper Comments
April 4, 2018.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–ISE–2018–24. 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 website (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 website 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.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–ISE–2018–24, and should
be submitted on or before May 1, 2018
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.13
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3
notice is hereby given that, on March
23, 2018, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE Arca’’) 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 selfregulatory organization. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend the
NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule (‘‘Fee
Schedule’’) by modifying the
description of the Options Regulatory
Fee (‘‘ORF’’). The proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
www.nyse.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
self-regulatory organization 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 those 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.
[FR Doc. 2018–07240 Filed 4–9–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
2 15
13 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Apr 09, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15437
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend the
Fee Schedule to clarify the description
of the ORF.
The Exchange charges an ORF in the
amount of $0.0055 per contract side.
The proposed rule change does not
change the amount of the ORF, but
instead modifies the rule text to clarify
how the ORF is assessed and collected.
Currently, the Exchange describes the
ORF as follows:
The Options Regulatory Fee will be
assessed on each OTP Holder or OTP Firm
for all options transactions executed or
cleared by the OTP Holder or OTP Firm that
are cleared by The Options Clearing
Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) in the customer range
regardless of the exchange on which the
transaction occurs. The fee is collected
indirectly from OTP Holders or OTP Firms
through their clearing firms by the OCC on
behalf of NYSE Arca. Effective December 1,
2012, an OTP Holder or OTP Firm shall not
be assessed the fee until it has satisfied
applicable technological requirements
necessary to commence operations on NYSE
Arca. The Exchange may only increase or
decrease the Options Regulatory Fee semiannually, and any such fee change will be
effective on the first business day of February
or August. The Exchange will notify
participants via a Trader Update of any
change in the amount of the fee at least 30
calendar days prior to the effective date of
the change.4
The Exchange proposes to modify this
description to more accurately reflect
how the ORF is imposed. Specifically,
the ORF is assessed to each OTP Holder
or OTP Firm (referred to herein
collectively as ‘‘OTP Holders’’) for all
options transactions cleared (but not
necessarily executed) by an OTP Holder
through the OCC in the customer range
regardless of the exchange on which the
transaction occurs. The ORF is only
assessed to OTP Holders that act as the
clearing firm for the transaction,
regardless of whether the executing firm
(if different from the clearing firm) is an
OTP Holder.5 Thus, the Exchange
proposes to delete the words ‘‘executed
or’’ from the current description of the
ORF, and to make clear that the ORF is
assessed ‘‘to each OTP Holder or OTP
4 See Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca GENERAL
OPTIONS and TRADING PERMIT (OTP) FEES,
Regulatory Fees, Options Regulatory Fee, available
here, https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/
markets/arca-options/NYSE_Arca_Options_Fee_
Schedule.pdf.
5 The Exchange uses reports from OCC to
determine the identity of the clearing firm and
compares that to the list of OTP Holders for billing
purposes.
E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM
10APN1
15438
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2018 / Notices
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Firm’’ on transactions ‘‘that are cleared
by the OTP Holder or OTP Firm through
The Options Clearing Corporation
(‘OCC’)’’ and that the ORF is ‘‘collected
from OTP Holder and OTP Firm
clearing firms by OCC on behalf of
NYSE Arca.’’ 6 The Exchange also
proposes to clarify that it ‘‘uses reports
from OCC when assessing and collecting
the ORF.’’ 7 The Exchange believes these
changes would clarify how the ORF is
assessed and collected. To illustrate
how the ORF is assessed and collected,
the Exchange provides the following set
of scenarios.
Scenario 1:
Executing (or Give-Up) Firm is not an
OTP. The Executing Firm does not
‘‘give-up’’ or ‘‘CMTA’’ the transaction to
another clearing firm.8
No ORF Fee is assessed.
Scenario 2:
Executing Firm is an OTP Holder. The
Executing Firm ‘‘give-ups’’ or ‘‘CMTAs’’
the transaction to another clearing firm
that is not an OTP Holder.
No ORF Fee is assessed.
Scenario 3:
The Executing (or Give-Up) Firm is an
OTP Holder. The Executing Firm does
not ‘‘give-up’’ or ‘‘CMTA’’ the
transaction to another clearing firm.
ORF Fee is assessed on the selfclearing Executing Firm.
Scenario 4:
The Executing (or Give-Up) Firm is an
OTP Holder. The Executing Firm ‘‘giveups’’ or ‘‘CMTAs’’ the transaction to
another clearing firm that is also an OTP
Holder.
ORF Fee is assessed on the CMTA
(clearing) firm.
Scenario 5:
The Executing (or Give-Up) Firm is
not an OTP Holder. The Executing Firm
‘‘give-ups’’ or ‘‘CMTAs’’ the transaction
to another clearing firm that is an OTP
Holder.
ORF Fee is assessed on the CMTA
(clearing) firm.
*
*
*
*
*
As illustrated above, the Exchange
does not assess the ORF on non-OTP
Holders that self-clear transactions, even
if the executing firm is an OTP Holder;
the Exchange likewise does not impose
the ORF if both the executing firm and
6 See proposed Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca
GENERAL OPTIONS and TRADING PERMIT (OTP)
FEES, Regulatory Fees, ORF. In connection with the
proposed revisions, the Exchange proposes to
remove as redundant the word ‘‘indirectly’’ from
the sentence explaining that the OCC collects the
ORF from the OTP Holder clearing firm. See id.
7 See id. See supra note 5.
8 A CMTA or Clearing Member Trade Assignment
is an agreement by which an investor may enter
derivative trades with a limited number of different
brokers and later consolidate these trades with one
brokerage house for clearing.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Apr 09, 2018
Jkt 244001
the firm that clears the transaction on its
behalf are non-OTP Holders.9
The Exchange proposes to modify the
Fee Schedule to make clear that it does
not assess the ORF on outbound linkage
trades.10 ‘‘Linkage trades’’ are tagged in
the Exchange’s system, so the Exchange
can distinguish them from other trades.
A customer order routed to another
exchange results in two customer trades,
one from the originating exchange and
one from the recipient exchange.
Charging ORF on both trades could
result in double-billing of ORF for a
single customer order, thus the
Exchange will not assess ORF on
outbound linkage trades in a linkage
scenario.
To further streamline the Fee
Schedule, the Exchange also proposes to
delete superfluous and obsolete
references to long-past effective dates.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
delete references to the effective dates of
December 1, 2012 and February 3, 2014,
which would add clarity and
transparency to the Fee Schedule.11 In
addition, the Exchange proposes to
define the Options Regulatory Fee as the
ORF and to utilize this shorthand
reference in the description of this fee.12
The Exchange notes that the ORF is
designed to recover a material portion of
the costs to the Exchange of the
supervision and regulation of OTP
Holder Customer transactions, including
performing routine surveillances and
investigations, as well as policy,
rulemaking, interpretive, and
enforcement activities. The Exchange
monitors the amount of revenue
collected from the ORF to ensure that
this revenue, in combination with other
regulatory fees and fines, does not
exceed regulatory costs. The Exchange
may only increase or decrease the ORF
semi-annually, and any such fee change
will be effective on the first business
day of February or August. If the
Exchange determines that regulatory
revenues exceed regulatory costs, the
Exchange will adjust the ORF by
9 Although the Exchange believes that its broad
regulatory responsibilities would support applying
the ORF to transactions that are executed (even if
not ultimately cleared) by an OTP Holder, the
Exchange only imposes the ORF on transactions
ultimately cleared by OTP Holders at this time. The
Exchange’s regulatory responsibilities are the same
regardless of whether an OTP Holder enters a
transaction or clears a transaction. The Exchange
regularly reviews all such activities, including
monitoring surveillance for position limit
violations, manipulation, front-running, contrary
exercise advice violations and insider trading.
These activities span across multiple exchanges.
10 See proposed Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca
GENERAL OPTIONS and TRADING PERMIT (OTP)
FEES, Regulatory Fees, ORF.
11 See id.
12 See id.
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
submitting a fee filing and notifying
OTP Holders via Trader Update at least
30 days prior to the effective date. The
Exchange believes that revenue
generated from the ORF, when
combined with all of the Exchange’s
other regulatory fees and fines, will
cover a material portion of the
Exchange’s regulatory costs.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6(b) 13 of the
Act, in general, and Section 6(b)(4) and
(5) 14 of the Act, in particular, in that it
is designed to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members and
other persons using its facilities and
does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The Exchange believes the proposed
changes to the description of ORF are
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the changes add
clarity and transparency to the Fee
Schedule by more accurately describing
how the ORF is assessed and collected.
The proposed change does not alter the
operation of the ORF, nor does it alter
the per contract rate of the ORF. The
Exchange believes that specifying that
OCC files are used to determine the
assessment and collection of the ORF
would add clarity and transparency to
the Fee Schedule.
The Exchange believes it is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to opt to not to assess
and collect the ORF when neither the
executing firm nor the CMTA (clearing)
firm is an OTP Holder because such
entities are not members of the
Exchange. Although the Exchange
believes that its broad regulatory
responsibilities would support applying
the ORF to transactions that are
executed (even if not ultimately cleared)
by an OTP Holder, because its
regulatory responsibilities are the same
regardless of whether an OTP Holder
executes a transaction or clears a
transaction, at this time the Exchange
imposes the ORF solely on transactions
ultimately cleared by OTP Holders.
The Exchange believes the ORF is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it is assessed to
all OTP Holders on all their transactions
that clear as customer at the OCC. The
Exchange believes it is appropriate to
assess the ORF only to transactions that
clear as customer at the OCC because
regulating OTP Holders’ customer
trading activity is more labor intensive
13 15
14 15
E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
10APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2018 / Notices
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
and requires greater expenditure of
human and technical resources than
regulating OTP Holders’ non-customer
trading activity. The Exchange believes
the ORF is designed to be fair by
assessing fees to those OTP Holders that
require more Exchange regulatory
services based on the amount of
customer options business they
conduct.
The Exchange believes it is
reasonable, equitable and
nondiscriminatory to not impose the
ORF on outbound linkage trades.
Linkage trades’’ are tagged in the
Exchange’s system, so the Exchange can
distinguish them from other trades. A
customer order routed to another
exchange results in two customer trades,
one from the originating exchange and
one from the recipient exchange.
Charging ORF on both trades could
result in double-billing of ORF for a
single customer order, thus the
Exchange will not assess ORF on
outbound linkage trades in a linkage
scenario.
The Exchange believes that the
proposal deleting outdated reference to
long-past effective dates and removing
the word ‘‘indirectly’’ is reasonable as it
would streamline the Fee Schedule by
removing superfluous language thereby
making the Fee Schedule easier for
market participants to navigate.
The ORF is designed to recover a
material portion of the costs to the
Exchange of the supervision and
regulation of OTP Holder customer
options business, including performing
routine surveillances and investigations,
as well as policy, rulemaking,
interpretive, and enforcement activities.
The Exchange monitors the amount of
revenue collected from the ORF to
ensure that this revenue, in combination
with other regulatory fees and fines,
does not exceed regulatory costs. The
Exchange has designed the ORF to
generate revenues that, when combined
with all of the Exchange’s other
regulatory fees, would be less than or
equal to the Exchange’s regulatory costs,
which is consistent with the view of the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) that regulatory fees be
used for regulatory purposes and not to
support the Exchange’s business side. In
this regard, the Exchange believes that
the ORF is reasonable.
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 that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. The
proposed rule change is not intended to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:56 Apr 09, 2018
Jkt 244001
address any competitive issues but
rather to provide more clarity and
transparency regarding how the
Exchange assesses and collects the ORF.
The Exchange believes any burden on
competition imposed by the proposed
rule change is outweighed by the need
to help the Exchange adequately fund
its regulatory activities to ensure
compliance with the Exchange Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited
or received with respect to the proposed
rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change is effective
upon filing pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) 15 of the Act and
subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 16
thereunder, because it establishes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by the
Exchange.
At any time within 60 days of the
filing of such 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 shall institute proceedings
under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 17 of the Act to
determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or
disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File No. SR–
NYSEArca–2018–19 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
15 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File No.
SR–NYSEArca–2018–19. 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 website (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 website 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.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No.
SR–NYSEArca–2018–19, and should be
submitted on or before May 1, 2018.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.18
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018–07244 Filed 4–9–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–82988; File No. SR–GEMX–
2018–11]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend Chapter IV of
the Exchange’s Schedule of Fees
April 4, 2018.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
16 17
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15439
18 17
E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
10APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15437-15439]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07244]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-82993; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2018-19]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule With Respect to the Options Regulatory Fee
April 4, 2018.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on March 23, 2018, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') 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 self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
\3\ 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 NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule'') by modifying the description of the Options
Regulatory Fee (``ORF''). The proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's website at www.nyse.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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to clarify the
description of the ORF.
The Exchange charges an ORF in the amount of $0.0055 per contract
side. The proposed rule change does not change the amount of the ORF,
but instead modifies the rule text to clarify how the ORF is assessed
and collected. Currently, the Exchange describes the ORF as follows:
The Options Regulatory Fee will be assessed on each OTP Holder
or OTP Firm for all options transactions executed or cleared by the
OTP Holder or OTP Firm that are cleared by The Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC'') in the customer range regardless of the
exchange on which the transaction occurs. The fee is collected
indirectly from OTP Holders or OTP Firms through their clearing
firms by the OCC on behalf of NYSE Arca. Effective December 1, 2012,
an OTP Holder or OTP Firm shall not be assessed the fee until it has
satisfied applicable technological requirements necessary to
commence operations on NYSE Arca. The Exchange may only increase or
decrease the Options Regulatory Fee semi-annually, and any such fee
change will be effective on the first business day of February or
August. The Exchange will notify participants via a Trader Update of
any change in the amount of the fee at least 30 calendar days prior
to the effective date of the change.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca GENERAL OPTIONS and TRADING
PERMIT (OTP) FEES, Regulatory Fees, Options Regulatory Fee,
available here, https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/arca-options/NYSE_Arca_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
The Exchange proposes to modify this description to more accurately
reflect how the ORF is imposed. Specifically, the ORF is assessed to
each OTP Holder or OTP Firm (referred to herein collectively as ``OTP
Holders'') for all options transactions cleared (but not necessarily
executed) by an OTP Holder through the OCC in the customer range
regardless of the exchange on which the transaction occurs. The ORF is
only assessed to OTP Holders that act as the clearing firm for the
transaction, regardless of whether the executing firm (if different
from the clearing firm) is an OTP Holder.\5\ Thus, the Exchange
proposes to delete the words ``executed or'' from the current
description of the ORF, and to make clear that the ORF is assessed ``to
each OTP Holder or OTP
[[Page 15438]]
Firm'' on transactions ``that are cleared by the OTP Holder or OTP Firm
through The Options Clearing Corporation (`OCC')'' and that the ORF is
``collected from OTP Holder and OTP Firm clearing firms by OCC on
behalf of NYSE Arca.'' \6\ The Exchange also proposes to clarify that
it ``uses reports from OCC when assessing and collecting the ORF.'' \7\
The Exchange believes these changes would clarify how the ORF is
assessed and collected. To illustrate how the ORF is assessed and
collected, the Exchange provides the following set of scenarios.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The Exchange uses reports from OCC to determine the identity
of the clearing firm and compares that to the list of OTP Holders
for billing purposes.
\6\ See proposed Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca GENERAL OPTIONS and
TRADING PERMIT (OTP) FEES, Regulatory Fees, ORF. In connection with
the proposed revisions, the Exchange proposes to remove as redundant
the word ``indirectly'' from the sentence explaining that the OCC
collects the ORF from the OTP Holder clearing firm. See id.
\7\ See id. See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario 1:
Executing (or Give-Up) Firm is not an OTP. The Executing Firm does
not ``give-up'' or ``CMTA'' the transaction to another clearing
firm.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ A CMTA or Clearing Member Trade Assignment is an agreement
by which an investor may enter derivative trades with a limited
number of different brokers and later consolidate these trades with
one brokerage house for clearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No ORF Fee is assessed.
Scenario 2:
Executing Firm is an OTP Holder. The Executing Firm ``give-ups'' or
``CMTAs'' the transaction to another clearing firm that is not an OTP
Holder.
No ORF Fee is assessed.
Scenario 3:
The Executing (or Give-Up) Firm is an OTP Holder. The Executing
Firm does not ``give-up'' or ``CMTA'' the transaction to another
clearing firm.
ORF Fee is assessed on the self-clearing Executing Firm.
Scenario 4:
The Executing (or Give-Up) Firm is an OTP Holder. The Executing
Firm ``give-ups'' or ``CMTAs'' the transaction to another clearing firm
that is also an OTP Holder.
ORF Fee is assessed on the CMTA (clearing) firm.
Scenario 5:
The Executing (or Give-Up) Firm is not an OTP Holder. The Executing
Firm ``give-ups'' or ``CMTAs'' the transaction to another clearing firm
that is an OTP Holder.
ORF Fee is assessed on the CMTA (clearing) firm.
* * * * *
As illustrated above, the Exchange does not assess the ORF on non-
OTP Holders that self-clear transactions, even if the executing firm is
an OTP Holder; the Exchange likewise does not impose the ORF if both
the executing firm and the firm that clears the transaction on its
behalf are non-OTP Holders.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Although the Exchange believes that its broad regulatory
responsibilities would support applying the ORF to transactions that
are executed (even if not ultimately cleared) by an OTP Holder, the
Exchange only imposes the ORF on transactions ultimately cleared by
OTP Holders at this time. The Exchange's regulatory responsibilities
are the same regardless of whether an OTP Holder enters a
transaction or clears a transaction. The Exchange regularly reviews
all such activities, including monitoring surveillance for position
limit violations, manipulation, front-running, contrary exercise
advice violations and insider trading. These activities span across
multiple exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to modify the Fee Schedule to make clear that
it does not assess the ORF on outbound linkage trades.\10\ ``Linkage
trades'' are tagged in the Exchange's system, so the Exchange can
distinguish them from other trades. A customer order routed to another
exchange results in two customer trades, one from the originating
exchange and one from the recipient exchange. Charging ORF on both
trades could result in double-billing of ORF for a single customer
order, thus the Exchange will not assess ORF on outbound linkage trades
in a linkage scenario.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See proposed Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca GENERAL OPTIONS and
TRADING PERMIT (OTP) FEES, Regulatory Fees, ORF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To further streamline the Fee Schedule, the Exchange also proposes
to delete superfluous and obsolete references to long-past effective
dates. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to delete references to the
effective dates of December 1, 2012 and February 3, 2014, which would
add clarity and transparency to the Fee Schedule.\11\ In addition, the
Exchange proposes to define the Options Regulatory Fee as the ORF and
to utilize this shorthand reference in the description of this fee.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See id.
\12\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange notes that the ORF is designed to recover a material
portion of the costs to the Exchange of the supervision and regulation
of OTP Holder Customer transactions, including performing routine
surveillances and investigations, as well as policy, rulemaking,
interpretive, and enforcement activities. The Exchange monitors the
amount of revenue collected from the ORF to ensure that this revenue,
in combination with other regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed
regulatory costs. The Exchange may only increase or decrease the ORF
semi-annually, and any such fee change will be effective on the first
business day of February or August. If the Exchange determines that
regulatory revenues exceed regulatory costs, the Exchange will adjust
the ORF by submitting a fee filing and notifying OTP Holders via Trader
Update at least 30 days prior to the effective date. The Exchange
believes that revenue generated from the ORF, when combined with all of
the Exchange's other regulatory fees and fines, will cover a material
portion of the Exchange's regulatory costs.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6(b) \13\ of the Act, in general, and
Section 6(b)(4) and (5) \14\ of the Act, in particular, in that it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes the proposed changes to the description of
ORF are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because
the changes add clarity and transparency to the Fee Schedule by more
accurately describing how the ORF is assessed and collected. The
proposed change does not alter the operation of the ORF, nor does it
alter the per contract rate of the ORF. The Exchange believes that
specifying that OCC files are used to determine the assessment and
collection of the ORF would add clarity and transparency to the Fee
Schedule.
The Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to opt to not to assess and collect the ORF when neither
the executing firm nor the CMTA (clearing) firm is an OTP Holder
because such entities are not members of the Exchange. Although the
Exchange believes that its broad regulatory responsibilities would
support applying the ORF to transactions that are executed (even if not
ultimately cleared) by an OTP Holder, because its regulatory
responsibilities are the same regardless of whether an OTP Holder
executes a transaction or clears a transaction, at this time the
Exchange imposes the ORF solely on transactions ultimately cleared by
OTP Holders.
The Exchange believes the ORF is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it is assessed to all OTP Holders on all their
transactions that clear as customer at the OCC. The Exchange believes
it is appropriate to assess the ORF only to transactions that clear as
customer at the OCC because regulating OTP Holders' customer trading
activity is more labor intensive
[[Page 15439]]
and requires greater expenditure of human and technical resources than
regulating OTP Holders' non-customer trading activity. The Exchange
believes the ORF is designed to be fair by assessing fees to those OTP
Holders that require more Exchange regulatory services based on the
amount of customer options business they conduct.
The Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable and
nondiscriminatory to not impose the ORF on outbound linkage trades.
Linkage trades'' are tagged in the Exchange's system, so the Exchange
can distinguish them from other trades. A customer order routed to
another exchange results in two customer trades, one from the
originating exchange and one from the recipient exchange. Charging ORF
on both trades could result in double-billing of ORF for a single
customer order, thus the Exchange will not assess ORF on outbound
linkage trades in a linkage scenario.
The Exchange believes that the proposal deleting outdated reference
to long-past effective dates and removing the word ``indirectly'' is
reasonable as it would streamline the Fee Schedule by removing
superfluous language thereby making the Fee Schedule easier for market
participants to navigate.
The ORF is designed to recover a material portion of the costs to
the Exchange of the supervision and regulation of OTP Holder customer
options business, including performing routine surveillances and
investigations, as well as policy, rulemaking, interpretive, and
enforcement activities. The Exchange monitors the amount of revenue
collected from the ORF to ensure that this revenue, in combination with
other regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed regulatory costs. The
Exchange has designed the ORF to generate revenues that, when combined
with all of the Exchange's other regulatory fees, would be less than or
equal to the Exchange's regulatory costs, which is consistent with the
view of the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') that
regulatory fees be used for regulatory purposes and not to support the
Exchange's business side. In this regard, the Exchange believes that
the ORF is reasonable.
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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not intended to address any competitive issues but rather to provide
more clarity and transparency regarding how the Exchange assesses and
collects the ORF. The Exchange believes any burden on competition
imposed by the proposed rule change is outweighed by the need to help
the Exchange adequately fund its regulatory activities to ensure
compliance with the Exchange Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \15\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \16\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \17\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 [email protected]. Please include
File No. SR-NYSEArca-2018-19 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 No. SR-NYSEArca-2018-19. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File No. SR-NYSEArca-2018-19, and should be submitted
on or before May 1, 2018.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-07244 Filed 4-9-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P