Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Make Permanent the Pilot Program for the Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program, Rule 4780, Which Is Set To Expire on June 30, 2019, Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1, and Order Granting Limited Exemption Pursuant to Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS, 31385-31388 [2019-13924]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2019 / Notices
persons, and issuing an order granting
to the Exchange limited exemptive relief
pursuant to Rule 612(c) of Regulation
NMS.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–86194; File No. SR–BX–
2019–011]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
BX, Inc.; Order Granting Accelerated
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change,
as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To
Make Permanent the Pilot Program for
the Exchange’s Retail Price
Improvement Program, Rule 4780,
Which Is Set To Expire on June 30,
2019, Notice of Filing of Amendment
No. 1, and Order Granting Limited
Exemption Pursuant to Rule 612(c) of
Regulation NMS
June 25, 2019.
I. Introduction
On April 26, 2019, Nasdaq BX, Inc.
(‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to
make permanent Exchange Rule 4780,
governing the Exchange’s Retail Price
Improvement Program (‘‘Program’’).3
The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on May 15, 2019.4 The
Commission has not received any
comment letters regarding the proposed
rule change. On June 21, 2019, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change.5 In connection
with the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, the
Exchange requests exemptive relief from
Rule 612 of Regulation NMS,6 which,
among other things, prohibits a national
securities exchange from accepting or
ranking orders priced greater than $1.00
per share in an increment smaller than
$0.01 (‘‘Sub-Penny Rule’’).7 The
Commission is issuing this order
approving the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, on an
accelerated basis, soliciting comments
on Amendment No. 1 from interested
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 In November 2014, the Commission approved
the Program on a pilot basis. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 73702 (November 28,
2014), 79 FR 72049 (December 4, 2014) (SR–BX–
2014–048) (‘‘RPI Approval Order’’).
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85811
(May 9, 2019), 84 FR 21868 (‘‘Notice’’).
5 Amendment No. 1, which is discussed further
below, is a partial amendment in which the
Exchange adds further analysis to support its
conclusion that the Program did not have a negative
impact on market quality. Amendment No. 1 may
be found at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-bx2019-011/srbx2019011-5723206-186048.pdf.
6 17 CFR 242.612(c).
7 See note 12 infra.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:58 Jun 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1
The Exchange proposes to make the
Program permanent. In the Notice and
Amendment No. 1, the Exchange set
forth and discussed its analysis of the
Program and basis for proposing
permanent approval.
Overview of the Program
The stated purpose of the Program is
to attract retail order flow to the
Exchange with the potential of such
order flow receiving price
improvement.8 All Regulation NMS
securities traded on the Exchange are
eligible for the RPI Program. The
Program is limited to trades occurring at
prices equal to or greater than $1.00 per
share.9
Exchange Rule 4780 sets forth the
rules governing the Program. Exchange
Rule 4780(a) contains the defined terms
for the Program. It defines a ‘‘Retail
Member Organization’’ (or ‘‘RMO’’) as a
Member (or a division thereof) that has
been approved by the Exchange to
submit Retail Orders. Under Exchange
Rule 4780(b)(1), to qualify as an RMO,
a Member of the Exchange must conduct
a retail business or route retail orders on
behalf of another broker-dealer.
Exchange Rule 4780(b)(2) sets forth the
process for a Member to apply to
become an RMO, which includes an
attestation from the Member that
substantially all orders that it submits as
Retail Orders will qualify as such.
Exchange Rule 4780(c) sets forth when
and how the Exchange would remove a
Member’s RMO Status (i.e.,
disqualification), and Exchange Rule
4780(d) sets forth the process for a
Member to appeal a disapproval of its
RMO application or an RMO
disqualification under Exchange Rule
4780(c).
Exchange Rule 4780(a) references the
Exchange’s order type rules under
Exchange Rule 4702 to define the terms
‘‘Retail Order’’ 10 and ‘‘Retail Price
8 See
Notice, supra note 4, at 21868.
Exchange Rule 4780(h).
10 Under Exchange Rule 4702(b)(6), a ‘‘Retail
Order’’ is defined as an order type with a nondisplay order attribute submitted to the Exchange
by an RMO. A Retail Order must be an agency
Order, or riskless principal Order that satisfies the
criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03. The Retail Order
must reflect trading interest of a natural person with
no change made to the terms of the underlying
order of the natural person with respect to price
(except in the case of a market order that is changed
to a marketable limit order) or side of market and
9 See
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31385
Improvement Order’’ (‘‘RPI Order’’ or
collectively, ‘‘RPI Interest’’).11 Both
Retail Orders and RPI Orders are nondisplay orders. A Retail Order must be
submitted by an RMO, and an RPI Order
must provide price improvement of at
least $0.001 to Retail Orders. RPI Orders
may only execute against Retail Orders,
and an RPI Order may only execute
against a Retail Order if it provides price
improvement of at least $0.001 better
than the national best bid or offer
(NBBO).12
Under Exchange Rule 4780(e), BX
disseminates an identifier when RPI
interest priced at least $0.001 better
than the Exchange’s Protected Bid or
Protected Offer for a particular security
is available in the System (‘‘Retail
Liquidity Identifier’’). The Retail
Liquidity Identifier is disseminated
through consolidated data streams (i.e.,
pursuant to the Consolidated Tape
Association Plan/Consolidated
Quotation System, or CTA/CQS, for
Tape A and Tape B securities, and The
Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’)
UTP Plan for Tape C securities) as well
as through proprietary Exchange data
feeds. The Retail Liquidity Identifier
reflects the symbol and the side (buy or
sell) of the RPI interest, but does not
include the price or size of the RPI
interest.
Under Exchange Rule 4780(f), an
RMO can designate how a Retail Order
interacts with available contra-side
interest as provided in the order type
Exchange Rule 4702. Under Exchange
Rule 4702(b)(6), Retail Orders can be
designated as either Type-1 or Type-2.
A Type 1-designated Retail Order will
attempt to execute against RPI Orders
and any other orders on the Exchange
Book with a price that is (i) equal to or
better than the price of the Type-1 Retail
Order and (ii) at least $0.001 better than
the NBBO. A Type-1 Retail Order is not
routable and will thereafter be
cancelled. A Type 2-designated Retail
Order will first attempt to execute
that does not originate from a trading algorithm or
any other computerized methodology.
11 Under Exchange Rule 4702(b)(5), an RPI Order
is defined as an order type with a non-display
attribute that is held on the Exchange Book in order
to provide liquidity at a price at least $0.001 better
than the NBBO through a special execution process
described in Rule 4780. A Retail Price Improving
Order may be entered in price increments of $0.001.
12 In the RPI Approval Order, the Commission
also granted the Exchange’s request for exemptive
relief from the Sub-Penny Rule. See RPI Approval
Order, supra note 3, at 72053. In conjunction with
this proposal to make the Program Permanent, the
Exchange has submitted a separate written request
for exemptive relief from the Sub-Penny Rule. See
Letter from Jeffrey S. Davis, Vice President and
Deputy General Counsel, Exchange, to Eduardo A.
Aleman, Deputy Secretary, Commission dated April
26, 2019.
E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM
01JYN1
31386
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2019 / Notices
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
against RPI Orders and any other orders
on the Exchange Book with a price that
is (i) equal to or better than the price of
the Type-2 Retail Order and (ii) at least
$0.001 better than the NBBO and will
then attempt to execute against any
other order on the Exchange Book with
a price that is equal to or better than the
price of the Type-2 Retail Order, unless
such executions would trade through a
Protected Quotation. A Type-2 Retail
Order may be designated as routable.
Exchange Rule 4780(g) sets forth the
priority and order allocation rules for
how RPI Orders are ranked against both
RPI and non-RPI orders when the
Exchange receives a contra-side Retail
Order. Competing RPI Orders in the
same security are ranked and allocated
according to price then time of entry
into the Exchange’s System, and .
Executions occur in price/time priority
in accordance with Exchange Rule 4757.
When an RPI executes against a Retail
Order, any remaining unexecuted RPI
interest will be available to interact with
other incoming Retail Orders if such
interest is at an eligible price, but any
remaining unexecuted portion of the
Retail Order will cancel or execute in
accordance with its Retail Order
designation under Exchange Rule
4780(f).
Exchange Rule 4780(h) currently
provides that the program is a pilot set
to expire the earlier of approval of this
proposal or June 30, 2019. The
Exchange proposes to eliminate this
provision of the rule and make the
Program permanent based on its
analysis of the Program.
Analysis of the Program
As more fully set forth in the Notice,
the Exchange submitted data and
analysis to support its proposal for
making the Program permanent.13 The
Exchange stated that the Program
provided $4.3 million in price
improvement to retail investors between
December 1, 2014 (the start of the
program) and May 2018.14 The
Exchange also asserted that the
segmentation of retail order flow on BX
increased competition for retail order
flow, which in turn increased retail
order flow to BX and creates additional
price improvement opportunities for
retail investors.15 Furthermore, the
Exchange concluded that it found no
data or that it received no customer
feedback indicating a negative impact of
the Program on overall market quality or
for retail investors.16
13 See
Notice, supra note 4, at 21872–21888.
id. at 21872.
15 See id. at 21887.
16 See id. at 21875.
14 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:58 Jun 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
In addition, the Exchange undertook a
difference-in-difference (‘‘DID’’) analysis
to analyze the Program’s impact on the
broader market.17 The Exchange noted
that the Program was not initially
designed to produce a DID analysis
because all stocks traded on BX were
eligible to receive price improvement
under the Program from the start.18 To
account for this, the Exchange identified
stocks with relatively high levels of
participation in the Program for use as
the ‘‘treatment’’ group, and used stocks
with low participation in the Program as
the ‘‘control’’ group.19 The Exchange
sought to enhance the validity of the
DID analysis by otherwise making the
treatment group and the control group
as similar as possible. The Exchange
divided the analysis into two parts:
Active securities and less active
securities. The active securities consist
of stocks with consolidated average
daily volume (‘‘CADV’’) of 500,000
shares or more. The less active
securities consist of stocks with CADV
of between 50,000 and 500,000 shares.20
Within each subgroup, the Exchange
conducted what it describes as a
‘‘matched pair’’ process to identify a
smaller set of treatment and control
groups that are as similar as possible
across three market quality statistics: (i)
Consolidated average daily share
volume; (ii) average price; and (iii)
average time-weighted quoted NBBO in
dollars and basis points (bps).21 To
conduct the analysis of the Program’s
effect on overall market quality, the
Exchange compared those statistics
during a pre-treatment period
(September 2014 to November 2014)
against those statistics during calendar
year 2015 and calendar years 2017–18,
obtaining a set of four DID regression
analyses.22 The Exchange did not see
sufficient consistency across the four
DID regressions to conclude that the
introduction of the Program caused
spreads to widen.23
17 A
DID statistical technique allows studying the
differential effect of a treatment on data measured
between a treatment group and a control group. The
two groups are measured during two or more
different time periods, usually a period before
‘‘treatment’’ and at least one time period after
‘‘treatment,’’ that is, a time period after which the
treatment group is impacted but the control group
is not. For each group, the difference between a
measure in the pre-treatment and the treatment
period is computed. Those differences for a
measure for the two groups are then compared to
each other by taking the difference between them.
18 See Notice, supra note 4, at 21876.
19 See id. at 21876–21879 for a full description of
the Exchange’s methodology.
20 See id.
21 See id.
22 See id., at 21878–21886 (Regression Results,
Analysis Sample Table, and Tables 1A–4B).
23 Id., at 21879.
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Based on results for each sample
group in the Exchange’s regression
analysis, the Exchange concluded that
the overall results were not statistically
significant to support a conclusion that
the introduction of the Program caused
spreads to widen.24 The Exchange’s
regressions suggested some increases in
spreads of the treatment stocks between
the pretreatment period and the post
treatment periods.25 In Amendment No.
1, however, the Exchange provided
more depth to its regression analysis by
noting that a single treatment stock’s
bps spread increased twelvefold while
its price dropped by 25% during the
treatment period.26 The Exchange
represented that when this stock and its
matched-sample control were removed
from the treatment group, the difference
in spreads demonstrated by the
regression analysis is not statistically
significant and demonstrated how
sensitive the data sample is to a single
outlier data point.27 Based on a lack of
consistent statistical evidence of any
impact and the small size of the
Program, the Exchange concluded that
the Program did not have a negative
impact on market quality.28
III. Discussion and Commission
Findings
After careful review, the Commission
finds that the Exchange’s proposal, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, to make
permanent the Program, Exchange Rule
4780, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder applicable to
a national securities exchange.29 In
particular, the Commission finds that
the proposed rule change, as modified
by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with
Sections 6(b)(5) 30 and 6(b)(8) 31 of the
Act. Section 6(b)(5) of the Act requires
that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed, among other
things, to promote just and equitable
24 See
id.
id., at 21878.
26 See Amendment No. 1.
27 In addition, in Amendment No. 1, the Exchange
noted that one of the analyses indicated increases
in dollar quoted and effective spreads of about 11⁄2
cents that were statistically significant (as compared
to relative (bps) spreads increases that did not meet
the standards of statistical significance). Noting that
an increase in dollar spreads without an increase in
bps spreads implies a general increase in the
average price level of the sample stocks during the
post period, the Exchange concluded that the
increase in dollar spreads may be attributed to a
factor unrelated to Program participation.
28 See id.
29 In approving this proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, the Commission
has considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
30 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
31 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
25 See
E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM
01JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2019 / Notices
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest, and not be designed to
permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
Section 6(b)(8) of the Act requires that
the rules of a national securities
exchange not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
The Commission approved the
Program on a pilot basis to allow the
Exchange and market participants to
gain valuable practical experience with
the Program during the pilot period, and
to allow the Commission to determine
whether modifications to the Program
were necessary or appropriate prior to
any Commission decision to approve or
disapprove the Program on a permanent
basis. The Program’s pilot period was
originally scheduled to end on
December 1, 2015, and the Exchange
filed to extend the operation of the pilot
on several occasions.32 The pilot is now
set to expire on June 30, 2019, and the
Exchange proposes to make the Program
permanent.
As set forth in the RPI Approval
Order, the Exchange agreed to provide
the Commission with a significant
amount of data to assist the
Commission’s evaluation of the Program
prior to any permanent approval of the
Program.33 Specifically, the Exchange
represented that it would ‘‘produce data
throughout the pilot, which will include
statistics about participation, the
frequency and level of price
improvement provided by the Program,
and any effects on the broader market
structure.’’ 34 The Commission expected
the Exchange to monitor the scope and
operation of the Program and study the
data produced during that time with
respect to such issues.35
After careful consideration, the
Commission believes that the
Exchange’s Program data and analysis
about price improvement for retail
investors and the DID analysis, as
supplemented by Amendment No. 1,
32 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
76490 (November 20, 2015), 80 FR 74165
(November 27, 2015) (SR–BX–2015–073); 79446
(December 1, 2016), 81 FR 88290 (December 7,
2016) (SR–BX–2016–065); 82192 (December 1,
2017), 82 FR 57809 (December 7, 2017) (SR–BX–
2017–055); 83539 (June 28, 2018), 83 FR 31203 (July
3, 2018) (SR–BX–2018–026); and 84847 (Dec. 18,
2018), 83 FR 66326 (Dec. 26, 2018) (SR–BX–2018–
063).
33 See RPI Approval Order, supra note 3, at
72053.
34 See id.
35 See id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:58 Jun 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
support the Exchange’s conclusion that
the Program provides meaningful price
improvement to retail investors on a
regulated exchange venue and has not
demonstrably caused harm to the
broader market. As noted above, the
Exchange demonstrated that during the
operation of the Program, retail orders
received price improvement on the
Exchange. Furthermore, in undertaking
the DID analysis, the Exchange
concluded that the spreads on the
Exchange did not widen to the
detriment of the broader market.36
Based on the foregoing, and after careful
consideration of the Exchange’s analysis
of the data generated by the Program,
the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment
No. 1, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act.
IV. Solicitation of Comments on
Amendment No. 1
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether Amendment No. 1 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–
BX–2019–011 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–BX–2019–011. 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
36 The Commission notes that it recently
approved on a permanent basis another exchange’s
substantially similar retail price improvement
program based on a similar type of DID analysis.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85160
(February 15, 2019), 84 FR 5754 (February 22, 2019)
(SR–NYSE–2018–28) (approving the New York
Stock Exchange’s Retail Liquidity Program on a
permanent basis and granting a limited exemption
to the Sub-Penny Rule).
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31387
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 this
filing will also 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–BX–2019–011 and should
be submitted on or before July 22, 2019.
V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed
Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1
The Commission finds good cause to
approve the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to
the 30th day after the date of
publication of notice of Amendment No.
1 in the Federal Register. Amendment
No. 1 supplements the proposal by
providing additional analysis of
Exchange’s Program data to support its
conclusion that there was no harm to
the overall market structure.
Specifically, in Amendment No. 1, the
Exchange supplements text in the
original notice to further explain its
regression analysis results for the DID.
In the Notice, the Exchange noted that
the regression analysis demonstrated
that there were some increase in spreads
of the treatment stocks, but the
Exchange concluded, among other
things, that the results were neither
statistically significant or consistent
enough across the sample groups to
conclude that the introduction of the
Program caused spreads to widen. In
Amendment No. 1, the Exchange
provided a more in-depth analysis by
noting that a single treatment stock’s
bps spread increased twelvefold while
its price dropped by 25% during the
treatment period. The Exchange
represented that when this stock and its
matched-sample control were removed
from the treatment group, difference in
spreads demonstrated by the regression
analysis is not statistically significant.
Amendment No. 1 does not contain any
proposed revisions to the Program itself
or its rule text.
E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM
01JYN1
31388
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2019 / Notices
The Exchange’s DID analysis, as
supplemented by Amendment No. 1,
assisted the Commission in evaluating
the Program’s impact and in
determining that permanent approval of
the Program, Exchange Rule 4780. The
Commission finds that Amendment No.
1 is reasonably designed to perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and the national market system, protect
investors and the public interest, and
not be unfairly discriminatory, or
impose an unnecessary or inappropriate
burden on competition. Accordingly,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,37 the Commission finds good cause
to approve the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, on an
accelerated basis.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
VI. Limited Exemption From the SubPenny Rule
Pursuant to its authority under Rule
612(c) of Regulation NMS,38 the
Commission hereby grants the Exchange
a limited exemption from the SubPenny Rule to operate the Program. For
the reasons discussed below, the
Commission determines that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, and is consistent with
the protection of investors.
When the Commission adopted the
Sub-Penny Rule in 2005, the
Commission identified a variety of
problems caused by sub-pennies that
the Sub-Penny Rule was designed to
address:
• If investors’ limit orders lose
execution priority for a nominal
amount, investors may over time
decline to use them, thus depriving the
markets of liquidity.
• When market participants can gain
execution priority for a nominal
amount, important customer protection
rules such as exchange priority rules
and the Manning Rule 39 could be
undermined.
• Flickering quotations that can result
from widespread sub-penny pricing
could make it more difficult for brokerdealers to satisfy their best execution
obligations and other regulatory
responsibilities.
• Widespread sub-penny quoting
could decrease market depth and lead to
higher transaction costs.
• Decreasing depth at the inside
could cause institutions to rely more on
execution alternatives away from the
exchanges, potentially increasing
37 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
38 17 CFR 242.612(c).
39 See Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
Rule 5320 (Prohibition Against Trading Ahead of
Customer Orders).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:58 Jun 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
fragmentation in the securities
markets.40
The Commission believes that the
limited exemption granted today should
continue to promote competition
between exchanges and OTC market
makers in a manner that is reasonably
designed to minimize the problems that
the Commission identified when
adopting the Sub-Penny Rule. Under the
Program, sub-penny prices will not be
disseminated through the consolidated
quotation data stream, which should
avoid quote flickering and its reduced
depth at the inside quotation.
Furthermore, the Commission does
not believe that granting this limited
exemption and approving the proposal
would reduce incentives for market
participants to display limit orders. As
noted in the RPI Approval Order,
market participants that displayed limit
orders at the time were not able to
interact with marketable retail order
flow because that order flow was almost
entirely routed to internalizing OTC
market makers that offered sub-penny
executions,41 and, as noted by the
Exchange, the Program has attracted a
small volume from the OTC market
makers.42 As a result, enabling the
Exchange to continue to compete for
retail order flow through the Program
should not materially detract from the
current incentives to display limit
orders, while potentially resulting in
greater order interaction and price
improvement for marketable retail
orders on a public national securities
exchange. To the extent that the
Program may raise Manning and best
execution issues for broker-dealers,
these issues are already presented by the
existing practices of OTC market
makers.
This permanent and limited
exemption from the Sub-Penny Rule is
limited solely to the operation of the
Program by the Exchange. This
exemption does not extend beyond the
scope of Exchange Rule 4780. In
addition, this exemption is conditioned
on the Exchange continuing to conduct
the Program, in accordance with
Exchange Rule 4780 and any other
Exchange Rules referenced therein, and
substantially as described in the
Exchange’s request for exemptive relief
and the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1.43 Any
changes in Exchange Rule 4780 may
40 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
41 See RPI Approval Order, supra note 3, at
72053.
42 See Notice, supra note 4, at 21872–86.
43 See supra Section III.
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
cause the Commission to reconsider this
exemption.
VII. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,44 that the
proposed rule change (SR–BX–2019–
011), as modified by Amendment No. 1,
be, and it hereby is, approved on an
accelerated basis.
It is further ordered that, pursuant to
Rule 612(c) under Regulation NMS, that
the Exchange shall be exempt from Rule
612(a) of Regulation NMS with respect
to the operation of the Program as set
forth in Exchange Rule 4780 as
described herein.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.45
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019–13924 Filed 6–28–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Notice of Intent To Rule on a Land
Release Request at North Central West
Virginia Airport (CKB), Clarksburg, WV
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
AGENCY:
The FAA proposes to rule and
invites public comment on the
application for a land release of 4.09
acres of federally obligated airport
property at North Central West Virginia
Airport (CKB), Clarksburg, WV, from the
conditions, reservations and restrictions
contained in Airport Improvement
Program grants that restrict the use of
said land to aeronautical purposes. This
acreage was originally purchased with
federal financial assistance through the
Airport Improvement Program. The
release will allow the airport to generate
revenue through the lease of a logistics
and storage park that is proposed for
construction. The proposed use of land
after the release will not interfere with
the airport or its operation.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 31, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Comments on this application may be
mailed or delivered to the FAA at the
following address: Matthew DiGiulian,
Manager, Beckley Airports Field Office,
SUMMARY:
44 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) and 17 CFR 200.30–
3(a)(83).
45 17
E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM
01JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 126 (Monday, July 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31385-31388]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13924]
[[Page 31385]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-86194; File No. SR-BX-2019-011]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Order Granting
Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, To Make Permanent the Pilot Program for the Exchange's
Retail Price Improvement Program, Rule 4780, Which Is Set To Expire on
June 30, 2019, Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1, and Order Granting
Limited Exemption Pursuant to Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS
June 25, 2019.
I. Introduction
On April 26, 2019, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to make permanent
Exchange Rule 4780, governing the Exchange's Retail Price Improvement
Program (``Program'').\3\ The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on May 15, 2019.\4\ The Commission has
not received any comment letters regarding the proposed rule change. On
June 21, 2019, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.\5\ In connection with the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, the Exchange requests exemptive relief from Rule 612
of Regulation NMS,\6\ which, among other things, prohibits a national
securities exchange from accepting or ranking orders priced greater
than $1.00 per share in an increment smaller than $0.01 (``Sub-Penny
Rule'').\7\ The Commission is issuing this order approving the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis,
soliciting comments on Amendment No. 1 from interested persons, and
issuing an order granting to the Exchange limited exemptive relief
pursuant to Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ In November 2014, the Commission approved the Program on a
pilot basis. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73702 (November
28, 2014), 79 FR 72049 (December 4, 2014) (SR-BX-2014-048) (``RPI
Approval Order'').
\4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85811 (May 9, 2019),
84 FR 21868 (``Notice'').
\5\ Amendment No. 1, which is discussed further below, is a
partial amendment in which the Exchange adds further analysis to
support its conclusion that the Program did not have a negative
impact on market quality. Amendment No. 1 may be found at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-bx-2019-011/srbx2019011-5723206-186048.pdf.
\6\ 17 CFR 242.612(c).
\7\ See note 12 infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1
The Exchange proposes to make the Program permanent. In the Notice
and Amendment No. 1, the Exchange set forth and discussed its analysis
of the Program and basis for proposing permanent approval.
Overview of the Program
The stated purpose of the Program is to attract retail order flow
to the Exchange with the potential of such order flow receiving price
improvement.\8\ All Regulation NMS securities traded on the Exchange
are eligible for the RPI Program. The Program is limited to trades
occurring at prices equal to or greater than $1.00 per share.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 21868.
\9\ See Exchange Rule 4780(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exchange Rule 4780 sets forth the rules governing the Program.
Exchange Rule 4780(a) contains the defined terms for the Program. It
defines a ``Retail Member Organization'' (or ``RMO'') as a Member (or a
division thereof) that has been approved by the Exchange to submit
Retail Orders. Under Exchange Rule 4780(b)(1), to qualify as an RMO, a
Member of the Exchange must conduct a retail business or route retail
orders on behalf of another broker-dealer. Exchange Rule 4780(b)(2)
sets forth the process for a Member to apply to become an RMO, which
includes an attestation from the Member that substantially all orders
that it submits as Retail Orders will qualify as such. Exchange Rule
4780(c) sets forth when and how the Exchange would remove a Member's
RMO Status (i.e., disqualification), and Exchange Rule 4780(d) sets
forth the process for a Member to appeal a disapproval of its RMO
application or an RMO disqualification under Exchange Rule 4780(c).
Exchange Rule 4780(a) references the Exchange's order type rules
under Exchange Rule 4702 to define the terms ``Retail Order'' \10\ and
``Retail Price Improvement Order'' (``RPI Order'' or collectively,
``RPI Interest'').\11\ Both Retail Orders and RPI Orders are non-
display orders. A Retail Order must be submitted by an RMO, and an RPI
Order must provide price improvement of at least $0.001 to Retail
Orders. RPI Orders may only execute against Retail Orders, and an RPI
Order may only execute against a Retail Order if it provides price
improvement of at least $0.001 better than the national best bid or
offer (NBBO).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Under Exchange Rule 4702(b)(6), a ``Retail Order'' is
defined as an order type with a non-display order attribute
submitted to the Exchange by an RMO. A Retail Order must be an
agency Order, or riskless principal Order that satisfies the
criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03. The Retail Order must reflect
trading interest of a natural person with no change made to the
terms of the underlying order of the natural person with respect to
price (except in the case of a market order that is changed to a
marketable limit order) or side of market and that does not
originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized
methodology.
\11\ Under Exchange Rule 4702(b)(5), an RPI Order is defined as
an order type with a non-display attribute that is held on the
Exchange Book in order to provide liquidity at a price at least
$0.001 better than the NBBO through a special execution process
described in Rule 4780. A Retail Price Improving Order may be
entered in price increments of $0.001.
\12\ In the RPI Approval Order, the Commission also granted the
Exchange's request for exemptive relief from the Sub-Penny Rule. See
RPI Approval Order, supra note 3, at 72053. In conjunction with this
proposal to make the Program Permanent, the Exchange has submitted a
separate written request for exemptive relief from the Sub-Penny
Rule. See Letter from Jeffrey S. Davis, Vice President and Deputy
General Counsel, Exchange, to Eduardo A. Aleman, Deputy Secretary,
Commission dated April 26, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Exchange Rule 4780(e), BX disseminates an identifier when RPI
interest priced at least $0.001 better than the Exchange's Protected
Bid or Protected Offer for a particular security is available in the
System (``Retail Liquidity Identifier''). The Retail Liquidity
Identifier is disseminated through consolidated data streams (i.e.,
pursuant to the Consolidated Tape Association Plan/Consolidated
Quotation System, or CTA/CQS, for Tape A and Tape B securities, and The
Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC (``Nasdaq'') UTP Plan for Tape C securities)
as well as through proprietary Exchange data feeds. The Retail
Liquidity Identifier reflects the symbol and the side (buy or sell) of
the RPI interest, but does not include the price or size of the RPI
interest.
Under Exchange Rule 4780(f), an RMO can designate how a Retail
Order interacts with available contra-side interest as provided in the
order type Exchange Rule 4702. Under Exchange Rule 4702(b)(6), Retail
Orders can be designated as either Type-1 or Type-2. A Type 1-
designated Retail Order will attempt to execute against RPI Orders and
any other orders on the Exchange Book with a price that is (i) equal to
or better than the price of the Type-1 Retail Order and (ii) at least
$0.001 better than the NBBO. A Type-1 Retail Order is not routable and
will thereafter be cancelled. A Type 2-designated Retail Order will
first attempt to execute
[[Page 31386]]
against RPI Orders and any other orders on the Exchange Book with a
price that is (i) equal to or better than the price of the Type-2
Retail Order and (ii) at least $0.001 better than the NBBO and will
then attempt to execute against any other order on the Exchange Book
with a price that is equal to or better than the price of the Type-2
Retail Order, unless such executions would trade through a Protected
Quotation. A Type-2 Retail Order may be designated as routable.
Exchange Rule 4780(g) sets forth the priority and order allocation
rules for how RPI Orders are ranked against both RPI and non-RPI orders
when the Exchange receives a contra-side Retail Order. Competing RPI
Orders in the same security are ranked and allocated according to price
then time of entry into the Exchange's System, and . Executions occur
in price/time priority in accordance with Exchange Rule 4757. When an
RPI executes against a Retail Order, any remaining unexecuted RPI
interest will be available to interact with other incoming Retail
Orders if such interest is at an eligible price, but any remaining
unexecuted portion of the Retail Order will cancel or execute in
accordance with its Retail Order designation under Exchange Rule
4780(f).
Exchange Rule 4780(h) currently provides that the program is a
pilot set to expire the earlier of approval of this proposal or June
30, 2019. The Exchange proposes to eliminate this provision of the rule
and make the Program permanent based on its analysis of the Program.
Analysis of the Program
As more fully set forth in the Notice, the Exchange submitted data
and analysis to support its proposal for making the Program
permanent.\13\ The Exchange stated that the Program provided $4.3
million in price improvement to retail investors between December 1,
2014 (the start of the program) and May 2018.\14\ The Exchange also
asserted that the segmentation of retail order flow on BX increased
competition for retail order flow, which in turn increased retail order
flow to BX and creates additional price improvement opportunities for
retail investors.\15\ Furthermore, the Exchange concluded that it found
no data or that it received no customer feedback indicating a negative
impact of the Program on overall market quality or for retail
investors.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 21872-21888.
\14\ See id. at 21872.
\15\ See id. at 21887.
\16\ See id. at 21875.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Exchange undertook a difference-in-difference
(``DID'') analysis to analyze the Program's impact on the broader
market.\17\ The Exchange noted that the Program was not initially
designed to produce a DID analysis because all stocks traded on BX were
eligible to receive price improvement under the Program from the
start.\18\ To account for this, the Exchange identified stocks with
relatively high levels of participation in the Program for use as the
``treatment'' group, and used stocks with low participation in the
Program as the ``control'' group.\19\ The Exchange sought to enhance
the validity of the DID analysis by otherwise making the treatment
group and the control group as similar as possible. The Exchange
divided the analysis into two parts: Active securities and less active
securities. The active securities consist of stocks with consolidated
average daily volume (``CADV'') of 500,000 shares or more. The less
active securities consist of stocks with CADV of between 50,000 and
500,000 shares.\20\ Within each subgroup, the Exchange conducted what
it describes as a ``matched pair'' process to identify a smaller set of
treatment and control groups that are as similar as possible across
three market quality statistics: (i) Consolidated average daily share
volume; (ii) average price; and (iii) average time-weighted quoted NBBO
in dollars and basis points (bps).\21\ To conduct the analysis of the
Program's effect on overall market quality, the Exchange compared those
statistics during a pre-treatment period (September 2014 to November
2014) against those statistics during calendar year 2015 and calendar
years 2017-18, obtaining a set of four DID regression analyses.\22\ The
Exchange did not see sufficient consistency across the four DID
regressions to conclude that the introduction of the Program caused
spreads to widen.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ A DID statistical technique allows studying the
differential effect of a treatment on data measured between a
treatment group and a control group. The two groups are measured
during two or more different time periods, usually a period before
``treatment'' and at least one time period after ``treatment,'' that
is, a time period after which the treatment group is impacted but
the control group is not. For each group, the difference between a
measure in the pre-treatment and the treatment period is computed.
Those differences for a measure for the two groups are then compared
to each other by taking the difference between them.
\18\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 21876.
\19\ See id. at 21876-21879 for a full description of the
Exchange's methodology.
\20\ See id.
\21\ See id.
\22\ See id., at 21878-21886 (Regression Results, Analysis
Sample Table, and Tables 1A-4B).
\23\ Id., at 21879.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on results for each sample group in the Exchange's regression
analysis, the Exchange concluded that the overall results were not
statistically significant to support a conclusion that the introduction
of the Program caused spreads to widen.\24\ The Exchange's regressions
suggested some increases in spreads of the treatment stocks between the
pretreatment period and the post treatment periods.\25\ In Amendment
No. 1, however, the Exchange provided more depth to its regression
analysis by noting that a single treatment stock's bps spread increased
twelvefold while its price dropped by 25% during the treatment
period.\26\ The Exchange represented that when this stock and its
matched-sample control were removed from the treatment group, the
difference in spreads demonstrated by the regression analysis is not
statistically significant and demonstrated how sensitive the data
sample is to a single outlier data point.\27\ Based on a lack of
consistent statistical evidence of any impact and the small size of the
Program, the Exchange concluded that the Program did not have a
negative impact on market quality.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See id.
\25\ See id., at 21878.
\26\ See Amendment No. 1.
\27\ In addition, in Amendment No. 1, the Exchange noted that
one of the analyses indicated increases in dollar quoted and
effective spreads of about 1\1/2\ cents that were statistically
significant (as compared to relative (bps) spreads increases that
did not meet the standards of statistical significance). Noting that
an increase in dollar spreads without an increase in bps spreads
implies a general increase in the average price level of the sample
stocks during the post period, the Exchange concluded that the
increase in dollar spreads may be attributed to a factor unrelated
to Program participation.
\28\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Discussion and Commission Findings
After careful review, the Commission finds that the Exchange's
proposal, as modified by Amendment No. 1, to make permanent the
Program, Exchange Rule 4780, is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\29\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent
with Sections 6(b)(5) \30\ and 6(b)(8) \31\ of the Act. Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act requires that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed, among other things, to promote just and equitable
[[Page 31387]]
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general,
to protect investors and the public interest, and not be designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers. Section 6(b)(8) of the Act requires that the rules of a
national securities exchange not impose any burden on competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ In approving this proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
\30\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\31\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission approved the Program on a pilot basis to allow the
Exchange and market participants to gain valuable practical experience
with the Program during the pilot period, and to allow the Commission
to determine whether modifications to the Program were necessary or
appropriate prior to any Commission decision to approve or disapprove
the Program on a permanent basis. The Program's pilot period was
originally scheduled to end on December 1, 2015, and the Exchange filed
to extend the operation of the pilot on several occasions.\32\ The
pilot is now set to expire on June 30, 2019, and the Exchange proposes
to make the Program permanent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 76490 (November
20, 2015), 80 FR 74165 (November 27, 2015) (SR-BX-2015-073); 79446
(December 1, 2016), 81 FR 88290 (December 7, 2016) (SR-BX-2016-065);
82192 (December 1, 2017), 82 FR 57809 (December 7, 2017) (SR-BX-
2017-055); 83539 (June 28, 2018), 83 FR 31203 (July 3, 2018) (SR-BX-
2018-026); and 84847 (Dec. 18, 2018), 83 FR 66326 (Dec. 26, 2018)
(SR-BX-2018-063).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As set forth in the RPI Approval Order, the Exchange agreed to
provide the Commission with a significant amount of data to assist the
Commission's evaluation of the Program prior to any permanent approval
of the Program.\33\ Specifically, the Exchange represented that it
would ``produce data throughout the pilot, which will include
statistics about participation, the frequency and level of price
improvement provided by the Program, and any effects on the broader
market structure.'' \34\ The Commission expected the Exchange to
monitor the scope and operation of the Program and study the data
produced during that time with respect to such issues.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See RPI Approval Order, supra note 3, at 72053.
\34\ See id.
\35\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After careful consideration, the Commission believes that the
Exchange's Program data and analysis about price improvement for retail
investors and the DID analysis, as supplemented by Amendment No. 1,
support the Exchange's conclusion that the Program provides meaningful
price improvement to retail investors on a regulated exchange venue and
has not demonstrably caused harm to the broader market. As noted above,
the Exchange demonstrated that during the operation of the Program,
retail orders received price improvement on the Exchange. Furthermore,
in undertaking the DID analysis, the Exchange concluded that the
spreads on the Exchange did not widen to the detriment of the broader
market.\36\ Based on the foregoing, and after careful consideration of
the Exchange's analysis of the data generated by the Program, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the requirements of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ The Commission notes that it recently approved on a
permanent basis another exchange's substantially similar retail
price improvement program based on a similar type of DID analysis.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85160 (February 15, 2019),
84 FR 5754 (February 22, 2019) (SR-NYSE-2018-28) (approving the New
York Stock Exchange's Retail Liquidity Program on a permanent basis
and granting a limited exemption to the Sub-Penny Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment No. 1
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 Number SR-BX-2019-011 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-BX-2019-011. 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 this filing will also 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-BX-2019-011 and should be submitted on
or before July 22, 2019.
V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1
The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the 30th day after the
date of publication of notice of Amendment No. 1 in the Federal
Register. Amendment No. 1 supplements the proposal by providing
additional analysis of Exchange's Program data to support its
conclusion that there was no harm to the overall market structure.
Specifically, in Amendment No. 1, the Exchange supplements text in the
original notice to further explain its regression analysis results for
the DID. In the Notice, the Exchange noted that the regression analysis
demonstrated that there were some increase in spreads of the treatment
stocks, but the Exchange concluded, among other things, that the
results were neither statistically significant or consistent enough
across the sample groups to conclude that the introduction of the
Program caused spreads to widen. In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange
provided a more in-depth analysis by noting that a single treatment
stock's bps spread increased twelvefold while its price dropped by 25%
during the treatment period. The Exchange represented that when this
stock and its matched-sample control were removed from the treatment
group, difference in spreads demonstrated by the regression analysis is
not statistically significant. Amendment No. 1 does not contain any
proposed revisions to the Program itself or its rule text.
[[Page 31388]]
The Exchange's DID analysis, as supplemented by Amendment No. 1,
assisted the Commission in evaluating the Program's impact and in
determining that permanent approval of the Program, Exchange Rule 4780.
The Commission finds that Amendment No. 1 is reasonably designed to
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and the national market
system, protect investors and the public interest, and not be unfairly
discriminatory, or impose an unnecessary or inappropriate burden on
competition. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\37\
the Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Limited Exemption From the Sub-Penny Rule
Pursuant to its authority under Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS,\38\
the Commission hereby grants the Exchange a limited exemption from the
Sub-Penny Rule to operate the Program. For the reasons discussed below,
the Commission determines that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, and is consistent with the protection of
investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 17 CFR 242.612(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the Commission adopted the Sub-Penny Rule in 2005, the
Commission identified a variety of problems caused by sub-pennies that
the Sub-Penny Rule was designed to address:
If investors' limit orders lose execution priority for a
nominal amount, investors may over time decline to use them, thus
depriving the markets of liquidity.
When market participants can gain execution priority for a
nominal amount, important customer protection rules such as exchange
priority rules and the Manning Rule \39\ could be undermined.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Rule 5320
(Prohibition Against Trading Ahead of Customer Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flickering quotations that can result from widespread sub-
penny pricing could make it more difficult for broker-dealers to
satisfy their best execution obligations and other regulatory
responsibilities.
Widespread sub-penny quoting could decrease market depth
and lead to higher transaction costs.
Decreasing depth at the inside could cause institutions to
rely more on execution alternatives away from the exchanges,
potentially increasing fragmentation in the securities markets.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission believes that the limited exemption granted today
should continue to promote competition between exchanges and OTC market
makers in a manner that is reasonably designed to minimize the problems
that the Commission identified when adopting the Sub-Penny Rule. Under
the Program, sub-penny prices will not be disseminated through the
consolidated quotation data stream, which should avoid quote flickering
and its reduced depth at the inside quotation.
Furthermore, the Commission does not believe that granting this
limited exemption and approving the proposal would reduce incentives
for market participants to display limit orders. As noted in the RPI
Approval Order, market participants that displayed limit orders at the
time were not able to interact with marketable retail order flow
because that order flow was almost entirely routed to internalizing OTC
market makers that offered sub-penny executions,\41\ and, as noted by
the Exchange, the Program has attracted a small volume from the OTC
market makers.\42\ As a result, enabling the Exchange to continue to
compete for retail order flow through the Program should not materially
detract from the current incentives to display limit orders, while
potentially resulting in greater order interaction and price
improvement for marketable retail orders on a public national
securities exchange. To the extent that the Program may raise Manning
and best execution issues for broker-dealers, these issues are already
presented by the existing practices of OTC market makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See RPI Approval Order, supra note 3, at 72053.
\42\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 21872-86.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This permanent and limited exemption from the Sub-Penny Rule is
limited solely to the operation of the Program by the Exchange. This
exemption does not extend beyond the scope of Exchange Rule 4780. In
addition, this exemption is conditioned on the Exchange continuing to
conduct the Program, in accordance with Exchange Rule 4780 and any
other Exchange Rules referenced therein, and substantially as described
in the Exchange's request for exemptive relief and the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.\43\ Any changes in Exchange
Rule 4780 may cause the Commission to reconsider this exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See supra Section III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\44\ that the proposed rule change (SR-BX-2019-011), as modified by
Amendment No. 1, be, and it hereby is, approved on an accelerated
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is further ordered that, pursuant to Rule 612(c) under
Regulation NMS, that the Exchange shall be exempt from Rule 612(a) of
Regulation NMS with respect to the operation of the Program as set
forth in Exchange Rule 4780 as described herein.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12) and 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(83).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-13924 Filed 6-28-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P