Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Modifying the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule Regarding Pricing Incentives for Certain Posted Volume, 30763-30768 [2020-10816]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 2020 / Notices
it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. If the
Commission takes such action, the
Commission will institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
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 Number SR–
CBOE–2020–043 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2020–043. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 May 19, 2020
Jkt 250001
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2020–043 and
should be submitted on or before June
10, 2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.11
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–10820 Filed 5–19–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–88873; File No. SR–
NYSEArca–2020–44]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Modifying the NYSE Arca
Options Fee Schedule Regarding
Pricing Incentives for Certain Posted
Volume
May 14, 2020.
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 May 11,
2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’ or
the ‘‘Exchange’’) 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.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to modify the
NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule (‘‘Fee
Schedule’’) regarding pricing incentives
for certain posted volume. The
Exchange proposes to implement the fee
change effective May 11, 2020.4 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.
11 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 15 U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
4 The Exchange originally filed to amend the Fee
Schedule on May 1, 2020 (SR–NYSEArca–2020–41)
and withdrew such filing on May 11, 2020.
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30763
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 purpose of this filing is to amend
the Fee Schedule to introduce a new
incentive program, and to modify other
credits to encourage a variety of
transactions to be executed on the
Exchange.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
adopt incentives designed to increase
Firm and Broker Dealer transactions on
the Exchange, including by offering
credits based on posted Firm and Broker
Dealer volume under existing and
proposed incentive programs, which
would increase available interest on the
Exchange to the benefit of all market
participants.5 The proposed change
would include a ‘‘cross-asset pricing’’
component to incentivize OTP Holders
and affiliates to execute a certain
amount of volume on both the
Exchange’s equities and options
platform.
The Exchange proposes to implement
the fee changes on May 11, 2020.
Background
The Commission has repeatedly
expressed its preference for competition
over regulatory intervention in
determining prices, products, and
services in the securities markets. In
Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO
revenues and, also, recognized that
current regulation of the market system
5 Firm and Broker Dealer transactions are
included as ‘‘Non-Customer’’ for purpose of fees
and credits. See Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca Options
Trade Related Charges For Standard Options,
available here, https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/
nyse/markets/arca-options/NYSE_Arca_Options_
Fee_Schedule.pdf (providing that for fee/credit
purposes, Firms, Broker Dealers, and Market
Makers are considered ‘‘Non-Customers’’ and,
unless otherwise specified, Professional Customers
are considered ‘‘Customers’’).
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
30764
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 2020 / Notices
‘‘has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its
broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.’’ 6
There are currently 16 registered
options exchanges competing for order
flow. Based on publicly-available
information, and excluding index-based
options, no single exchange has more
than 16% of the market share of
executed volume of multiply-listed
equity and ETF options trades.7
Therefore, currently no exchange
possesses significant pricing power in
the execution of multiply-listed equity &
ETF options order flow. More
specifically, in January 2020, the
Exchange had less than 10% market
share of executed volume of multiplylisted equity & ETF options trades.8
Similarly, the equities markets also face
stark competition, which is relevant
because the Exchange may offer ‘‘crossasset pricing,’’ which is designed to
incent participants to execute a certain
amount of volume on both the
Exchange’s equities and options
platform. As the Commission itself
recognized, the market for trading
services in NMS stocks has become
‘‘more fragmented and competitive.’’ 9
Indeed, equity trading is currently
dispersed across 13 exchanges,10 31
alternative trading systems,11 and
numerous broker-dealer internalizers
and wholesalers, all competing for order
flow. Based on publicly-available
information, no single exchange has
more than 18% market share (whether
including or excluding auction
volume).12 Therefore, currently no
single exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of equity
order flow. More specifically, the
6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005)
(S7–10–04) (‘‘Reg NMS Adopting Release’’).
7 The OCC publishes options and futures volume
in a variety of formats, including daily and monthly
volume by exchange, available here: https://
www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
8 Based on OCC data, see id., in 2019, the
Exchange’s market share in equity-based options
was 9.57% for the month of January 2019 and
9.59% for the month of January 2020.
9 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84875
(December 19, 2018), 84 FR 5202, 5253 (February
20, 2019) (File No. S7–05–18) (Transaction Fee Pilot
for NMS Stocks Final Rule).
10 See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market
Volume Summary, available here https://
markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/. See
generally https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/
divisionsmarketregmrexchangesshtml.html.
11 See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available
here: https://otctransparency.finra.org/otc
transparency/AtsIssueData. A list of alternative
trading systems registered with the Commission is
available at https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/
atslist.htm.
12 See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Equities Market
Volume Summary, available here: https://markets.
cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 May 19, 2020
Jkt 250001
Exchange’s market share of trading in
Tapes A, B and C securities combined
is less than 10%.
The Exchange believes that the evershifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month
demonstrates that market participants
can shift order flow or discontinue or
reduce use of certain categories of
products. To respond to this
competitive marketplace, the Exchange
has established incentives—or posting
credit tiers—designed to encourage OTP
Holders and OTP Firms (collectively,
‘‘OTP Holders’’) to direct additional
order flow to the Exchange to achieve
more favorable pricing and higher
credits. The Exchange incentives also
include ‘‘cross-asset pricing,’’ which
allows OTP Holders to aggregate their
options and equity volume with
affiliated or appointed Order Flow
Providers (‘‘OFPs’’) (collectively
referred to as affiliates herein), making
the NYSE Arca a more attractive trading
venue.13
The Exchange proposes to modify its
existing posting credit tiers and adopt a
new posting credit tier program that
would offer more favorable rates for
increased Firm and Broker Dealer
volume beyond certain minimum
thresholds. The Exchange also proposes
a related new incentive program that
incorporates cross-asset pricing for OTP
Holders that meet minimum Firm and
Broker Dealer volume thresholds. The
proposed change should encourage OTP
Holders to increase their participation
on the Exchange, thereby improving the
quoted markets and attracting more
order flow to the Exchange. The
Exchange notes that the proposed
change would be competitive with other
options exchanges that offer pricing
incentive for Firm and Broker Dealer
volume as well as cross-asset pricing
incentives.14
Proposed Rule Change
Firm and Broker Dealer Incentives
The Exchange proposes to adopt a
new incentive program that would
provide increasing levels of credit for
posted Firm and Broker Dealer interest
13 See Fee Schedule, Endnote 15 (providing that
an ‘‘Appointed MM’’ is an NYSE Arca Market
Maker designated as such by an Order Flow
Provider (‘‘OFP’’) (as defined in NYSE Arca Rule
6.1A–O(a)(21)) and ‘‘Appointed OFP’’ is an OFP
been designated as such by an NYSE Arca Market
Maker).
14 See, e.g., Cboe BZX Options Exchange Fee
Schedule, available here, https://markets.cboe.com/
us/options/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/ (setting
forth posting volume tiers for Firm and Broker
Dealer volume in Penny Pilot Issues); Cboe BZX
U.S. Equities Exchange Fee Schedule, Footnote 1
and Cboe EDGX Options Exchange Fee Schedule,
Footnote 4 (regarding cross-asset pricing).
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
in Penny Pilot issues (the ‘‘FBD Posting
Incentive’’).15 The Exchange currently
provides a $0.10 per contract credit on
electronic executions of Firm and
Broker Dealer posted interest in Penny
Pilot issues, and proposes to include
this $0.10 credit in the FBD Posting
Incentive table for reference only.16 As
proposed, OTP Holders that execute at
least 0.15% of Total Customer Average
Daily Volume (‘‘TCADV’’) 17 from Firm
and Broker Dealer posted interest in all
issues, which would qualify them for
the Tier 1 level under the proposed FBD
Posting Incentive, would receive a per
contract credit of $0.25. OTP Holders
that execute at least 0.30% of TCADV
from Firm and Broker Dealer posted
interest in all issues, which would
qualify them for the Tier 2 level under
the proposed FBD Posting Incentive,
would receive a per contract of $0.35.
As is the case with current posting
credit tiers, OTP Holders may aggregate
their volume with affiliated OTPs to
achieve the proposed credits.18
The Exchange also proposes that OTP
Holders that qualify for either the Tier
1 or Tier 2 FBD Posting Incentive
described above may earn the greater of
one of the following additional
credits.19 The first alternative of the
proposed ‘‘Firm and Broker Dealer
Incentive Program’’ would be a crossasset incentive that would provide an
additional $0.03 per contract credit to
OTP Holders that execute at least 0.30%
ADV of U.S Equity Tape C Market Share
Posted and Executed on NYSE Arca
Tape C Equity Market. The second
alternative would provide an additional
$0.05 per contract credit to OTP Holders
that execute at least 0.85% of TCADV of
posted interest in all issues across all
account types, of which at least 0.60%
TCADV is from Firm and Broker Dealer
15 See proposed Fee Schedule, FIRM AND
BROKER DEALER PENNY PILOT POSTING
CREDIT TIERS (providing in the preamble that
‘‘OTP Holders and OTP Firms meeting the
qualifications below will receive the corresponding
credit on all electronic executions of Firm and
Broker Dealer posted interest in Penny Pilot
Issues’’).
16 See Fee Schedule, id.; see also TRANSACTION
FEE FOR ELECTRONIC EXECUTIONS—PER
CONTRACT (referring in both places to same $0.10
credit on Firm Broker Dealer transactions).
17 TCADV includes OCC calculated Customer
volume of all types, including Complex Order
Transactions and QCC transactions, in equity and
ETF options. See Fee Schedule, Endnote 8.
18 See proposed Fee Schedule, Endnotes 8
(providing that the proposed incentives will
include the activity of affiliates) and 15 (defining
affiliates referenced in Endnote 8).
19 See proposed Fee Schedule, Firm and Broker
Dealer Incentive Program (providing that OTP
Holders ‘‘that qualify for Tier 1 or Tier 2 Firm and
Broker-Dealer Penny Pilot Posting Credit Tiers may
earn the greater of the alternative additional credits
listed above’’ and referencing Endnotes 8 and 15).
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 2020 / Notices
posted interest. If an OTP Holder
qualifies for both additional credits,
they would earn the greater of the two
additional credits, not both.
To further encourage Firm and Broker
dealer volume, the Exchange also
proposes to add alternative qualification
bases to the existing posting tiers set
forth in both the Non-Customer, NonPenny Pilot Posting Credit Tiers and the
Customer and Professional Customer
Posting Credit Tiers in Non-Penny Pilot
Issues. As noted above, an OTP Holder
that executes at least 0.15% of TCADV
from Firm and Broker Dealer posted
interest in all issues (the ‘‘FirmBD
Threshold’’) qualifies for Tier 1 of the
proposed Firm and Broker Dealer
Posting Credit Tiers. The Exchange
proposes to add a new Tier to the NonCustomer, Non-Penny Pilot Posting
Credit Tiers, and amend existing Tier A
to the Customer and Professional
Customer Posting Credit Tiers in NonPenny Pilot Issues, to provide that if an
OTP Holder that meets the FirmBD
Threshold and also executes at least
0.10% TCADV from Customer posted
interest in all issues, that OTP Holder
would qualify for the following per
contract credits on electronic executions
(the ‘‘CustFirmBD Threshold’’):
• A $0.62 per contract credit from
non-Customer posted interest in nonPenny Pilot issues, as proposed
alternative qualification to new Tier 3 of
the Non-Customer, Non-Penny Pilot
Posting Credit Tiers; and
• A $0.85 per contract credit from
Customer posted interest in non-Penny
Pilot issues, as proposed alternative
qualification to Tier A of Customer and
Professional Customer Posting Credit
Tiers in Non-Penny Issues.20
Customer Penny and Non-Customer
Non-Penny Volume Incentives
The Exchange also proposes
additional modifications to the existing
posting credit tier qualification
thresholds and credits to encourage
diverse order flow.
First, the Exchange proposes to
modify the existing qualifications for
Tier 2 under the Customer Penny Pilot
20 The
Exchange notes that the $0.85 per contract
credit would be an increase (from $0.83) to the
existing Tier A qualification basis that an OTP
Holder execute ‘‘[a]t least 0.80% of TCADV from
Customer posted interest in all issues.’’ See Fee
Schedule, Customer Posting Credit Tiers in NonPenny Issues. The Exchange proposes to remove
reference to Professional Customer from the column
heading given that such transactions are treated the
same as Customer, which change would add clarity,
transparency and internal consistency to the Fee
Schedule making it easier to navigate. See proposed
Fee Schedule, CUSTOMER POSTING CREDIT
TIERS IN NON-PENNY PILOT ISSUES (with
updated column title ‘‘Customer Posting Credit
Tiers In Non-Penny Pilot Issues’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 May 19, 2020
Jkt 250001
Posting Credit Tiers by replacing the
existing alternative qualification, which
requires an OTP Holder to have at least
0.70% of TCADV from posted interest in
Penny Pilot Issues in all account types,
with a new proposed Tier 2 alternative
that would require an OTP Holder to
increase or step-up posted interest in all
issues, all account types other than
Market Maker by at least 0.15% of
TCADV over its March 2020 level of
posted interest in all issues, all account
types other than Market Maker.21 The
amount of the contract credit for Tier 2
would not change. The Exchange notes
that although it has deleted the existing
Tier 2 alternative qualification basis, an
OTP Holder can still aim to achieve
credits based on posted interest in
Penny Pilot Issues under Tier 4, which
has a slightly higher (0.85%) minimum
qualification basis.22
The Exchange also proposes to modify
the Non-Customer, Non-Penny Pilot
Posting Credit Tiers by introducing a
new Tier 3 with two alternatives to
qualify for the proposed credit. As
described above, OTP Holders can
qualify for a $0.62 per contract credit in
proposed Tier 3 by achieving the
CustFirmBD Threshold. As an
alternative, OTP Holders can qualify for
the same Tier 3 credit by executing at
least 0.15% of TCADV from nonCustomer posted interest in all nonPenny issues. In addition, current Tier
3 would become new Tier 4, and the
qualification threshold for that tier
would be increased to require at least
0.25% of TCADV (up from 0.20%) from
Non-Customer posted interest in all
non-Penny Issues and the per contract
credit of $0.82 would remain
unchanged.23
The Exchange believes the proposed
changes to the posting tiers are
reasonable because OTP Holders (and
their affiliates) can bring a variety of
order flow to the Exchange, which may
result in an increase volume and
liquidity on both its options and equites
platforms. The Exchange’s fees are
constrained by intermarket competition,
as OTP Holders may direct their order
21 See proposed Fee Schedule, CUSTOMER
PENNY PILOT POSTING CREDIT TIERS. As an
example: If TCADV for the month of May 2020 is
1,500,000 contracts, then 0.15% of the TCADV
would be 2,250 contracts. Assume an OTP Holder
had an ADV in March 2020 of 11,000 contracts from
posted Customer and Non-Customer interest
(excluding Market Maker interest). To qualify for
Tier 2 under this alternative, the OTP Holder would
have to increase its posted Customer and Non
Customer volumes (exclusive of Market Maker
interest) by at least 2,250 contracts ADV, to a
minimum level of 13,250 contracts ADV.
22 See Fee Schedule, CUSTOMER PENNY PILOT
POSTING CREDIT TIERS, Tier 4.
23 See proposed Fee Schedule, NON-CUSTOMER,
NON-PENNY PILOT POSTING CREDIT TIERS.
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30765
flow to any of the 16 options exchanges,
including those with similar posting
incentives.24 The proposed cross-asset
pricing is designed to encourage
participants to (continue to) conduct
trading in both options and equities on
the Exchange. The Exchange notes that
all market participants stand to benefit
from increased transaction volume,
which promotes market depth,
facilitates tighter spreads and enhances
price discovery, and may lead to a
corresponding increase in order flow
from other market participants.
The Exchange cannot predict with
certainty whether any OTP Holders
would avail themselves of this proposed
fee change by achieving any of the
qualifications. At present, whether or
when an OTP Holder qualifies for the
various incentive Tiers in a given month
is dependent on market activity and an
OTP Holder’s mix of order flow. Thus,
the Exchange cannot predict with any
certainty the number of OTP Holders
that may qualify for the various
proposed tiers—especially because the
proposed credits for Firm and Broker
Dealer volume would be new. However,
the Exchange believes that OTP Holders
would be encouraged to take advantage
of the newly adopted and modified
credits.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act,25 in general, and
furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,26 in particular,
because it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members,
issuers and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly
discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
The Proposed Rule Change Is
Reasonable
The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market. The Commission
has repeatedly expressed its preference
for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities
markets. In Regulation NMS, the
Commission highlighted the importance
of market forces in determining prices
and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market
system ‘‘has been remarkably successful
in promoting market competition in its
24 See
supra note 14.
U.S.C. 78f(b).
26 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
25 15
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
30766
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 2020 / Notices
broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.’’ 27
There are currently 16 registered
options exchanges competing for order
flow. Based on publicly-available
information, and excluding index-based
options, no single exchange has more
than 16% of the market share of
executed volume of multiply-listed
equity and ETF options trades.28
Therefore, currently no exchange
possesses significant pricing power in
the execution of multiply-listed equity &
ETF options order flow. More
specifically, in January 2020, the
Exchange had less than 10% market
share of executed volume of multiplylisted equity & ETF options trades.29 In
addition, by including the cross-asset
pricing in the Firm and Broker Dealer
Incentive Program, it is important to
note that the equities market is likewise
subject to stark competition. As the
Commission itself recognized, the
market for trading services in NMS
stocks has become ‘‘more fragmented
and competitive.’’ 30 Indeed, equity
trading is currently dispersed across 13
exchanges, 32 alternative trading
systems, and numerous broker-dealer
internalizers and wholesalers, all
competing for order flow. Based on
publicly-available information, no
single exchange has more than 18%
market share (whether including or
excluding auction volume). Therefore,
no exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of equity
order flow. More specifically, the
Exchange’s market share of trading in
Tapes A, B, and C securities combined
is less than 1%.
The Exchange believes that the evershifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month
demonstrates that market participants
can shift order flow, or discontinue or
reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes.
Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain options exchange transaction
fees. Stated otherwise, changes to
exchange transaction fees can have a
direct effect on the ability of an
exchange to compete for order flow.
The proposed changes are designed to
incent OTP Holders to transact more
options (and equities) volume on the
27 See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 6,
at 37499.
28 The OCC publishes options and futures volume
in a variety of formats, including daily and monthly
volume by exchange, available here: https://www.
theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
29 Based on OCC data, see id., in 2019, the
Exchange’s market share in equity-based options
was 9.57% for the month of January 2019 and
9.59% for the month of January 2020.
30 See supra note 9.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 May 19, 2020
Jkt 250001
Exchange. The FBD Posting Incentive is
designed to encourage OTP Holders to
increase the Firm and Broker dealer
volume sent to the Exchange for
execution. The Firm and Broker Dealer
Incentive Program, which will be
available to participants that qualify for
the FBD Posting Incentive, would
encourage increased equity market
participation by OTP Holders and their
affiliates. The Exchange believes this
should increase volume and liquidity—
on both its options and equites
platforms—to the benefit of all market
participants by providing more trading
opportunities and tighter spreads, and
may lead to a corresponding increase in
order flow from other market
participants.
Further, the proposed FBD Posting
Incentive and related cross-asset pricing
incentive are similar to and competitive
with posting credit tiers for Firm and
Broker Dealer volume and cross-asset
pricing offered by other exchanges and
is designed to attract (and compete for)
order flow to the Exchange, which
provides a greater opportunity for
trading by all market participants.31
The Exchange believes that the
proposed change to add new posting
tiers as well as to modify thresholds and
credits available under existing posting
credit tiers would incent OTP Holders
to increase the number and variety
orders sent to the Exchange for
execution. Further, the Exchange notes
that it continues to provide OTP
Holders alternative methods (and thus
increased opportunities) to qualify for
posting credits and pricing incentives,
resulting in favorable rates for a variety
of order types. As such, OTP Holders
would be encouraged to increase their
participation on the Exchange, thereby
improving the quoted markets and
attracting more order flow to the
Exchange. To the extent that the
proposed change attracts more order
flow to the Exchange, this increased
order flow would continue to make the
Exchange a more competitive venue for
order execution, which, in turn,
promotes just and equitable principles
of trade and removes impediments to
and perfects the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market
system.
Finally, to the extent the proposed
change continues to attract greater
volume and liquidity, the Exchange
believes the proposed change would
improve the Exchange’s overall
competitiveness and strengthen its
market quality for all market
participants. In the backdrop of the
competitive environment in which the
31 See
PO 00000
supra note 14.
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Exchange operates, the proposed rule
change is a reasonable attempt by the
Exchange to increase the depth of its
market and improve its market share
relative to its competitors.
The Exchange cannot predict with
certainty whether any OTP Holders
would avail themselves of this proposed
fee change. At present, whether or when
an OTP Holder qualifies for the various
incentive Tiers in a given month is
dependent on market activity and an
OTP Holders mix of order flow. Thus,
the Exchange cannot predict with any
certainty the number of OTP Holders
that may qualify for the various
proposed tiers—especially because the
credits for Firm and Broker Dealer
volume is brand new. However, the
Exchange believes that OTP Holders
would be encouraged to take advantage
of the newly adopted and modified
credits.
The Proposed Rule Change Is an
Equitable Allocation of Credits and Fees
The Exchange believes the proposed
rule change is an equitable allocation of
its fees and credits. The proposal is
based on the amount and type of
business transacted on the Exchange
and OTP Holders can opt to avail
themselves of the incentives or not.
Moreover, the proposal is designed to
encourage OTP Holders to submit orders
from all account types to the Exchange
as a primary execution venue. To the
extent that the proposed change attracts
more Firm and Broker Dealer orders to
the Exchange, this increased order flow
would continue to make the Exchange a
more competitive venue for order
execution. Thus, the Exchange believes
the proposed rule change would
improve market quality for all market
participants on the Exchange and, as a
consequence, attract more order flow to
the Exchange thereby improving marketwide quality and price discovery.
The Proposed Rule Change Is not
Unfairly Discriminatory
The Exchange believes it is not
unfairly discriminatory to introduce the
various Tiers because the proposed
modifications would be available to all
similarly-situated market participants
on an equal and non-discriminatory
basis.
The proposal is based on the amount
and type of business transacted on the
Exchange and OTP Holders are not
obligated to try to achieve the
qualifications for any of the tiers, nor
are they obligated to execute Firm and
Broker Dealer orders. Rather, the
proposal is designed encourage OTP
Holders to utilize the Exchange as a
primary trading venue for Firm and
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 2020 / Notices
Broker Dealer Executions (if they have
not done so previously) or increase
volume sent to the Exchange. To the
extent that the proposed change attracts
more Firm and Broker Dealer orders to
the Exchange, this increased order flow
would continue to make the Exchange a
more competitive venue for, among
other things, order execution. Thus, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule
change would improve market quality
for all market participants on the
Exchange and, as a consequence, attract
more order flow to the Exchange thereby
improving market-wide quality and
price discovery. The resulting increased
volume and liquidity would provide
more trading opportunities and tighter
spreads to all market participants and
thus would promote just and equitable
principles of trade, 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.
Finally, the Exchange believes that it
is subject to significant competitive
forces, as described below in the
Exchange’s statement regarding the
burden on competition.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of
the Act, the Exchange does not believe
that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Instead, as discussed above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed
changes would encourage the
submission of additional liquidity to a
public exchange, thereby promoting
market depth, price discovery and
transparency and enhancing order
execution opportunities for all market
participants. As a result, the Exchange
believes that the proposed change
furthers the Commission’s goal in
adopting Regulation NMS of fostering
integrated competition among orders,
which promotes ‘‘more efficient pricing
of individual stocks for all types of
orders, large and small.’’ 32
Intramarket Competition. The
proposed change is designed to attract
additional order flow (particularly Firm
and Broker Dealer orders) to the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that
the proposed FBD Posting Incentive,
and related cross-asset pricing, would
encourage market participants to direct
a variety of order flow to the Exchange,
including Firm and Broker Dealer
32 See
Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 6,
at 37499.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 May 19, 2020
Jkt 250001
execution volume to the Exchange.
Greater liquidity benefits all market
participants on the Exchange and
increased Firm and Broker Dealer
transactions would increase
opportunities for execution of other
trading interest. The proposed change
would be available to all similarlysituated market participants (including
those that handle Firm and Broker
Dealer order flow), and, as such, the
proposed change would not impose a
disparate burden on competition among
market participants on the Exchange.
Intermarket Competition. The
Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market
participants can readily favor one of the
16 competing option exchanges if they
deem fee levels at a particular venue to
be excessive. In such an environment,
the Exchange must continually adjust its
fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges and to attract order flow to
the Exchange. Based on publiclyavailable information, and excluding
index-based options, no single exchange
has more than 16% of the market share
of executed volume of multiply-listed
equity and ETF options trades.33
Therefore, currently no exchange
possesses significant pricing power in
the execution of multiply-listed equity &
ETF options order flow. More
specifically, in January 2020, the
Exchange had less than 10% market
share of executed volume of multiplylisted equity & ETF options trades.34
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment because it
modifies the Exchange’s fees in a
manner designed to encourage OTP
Holders (and affiliates) to direct trading
interest (particularly Firm and Broker
Dealer order flow) to the Exchange, to
provide liquidity and to attract order
flow. To the extent that this purpose is
achieved, all the Exchange’s market
participants should benefit from the
improved market quality and increased
opportunities for price improvement.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed change could promote
competition between the Exchange and
other execution venues, including those
that currently offer similar incentives,
by encouraging additional orders to be
sent to the Exchange for execution.35
33 The OCC publishes options and futures volume
in a variety of formats, including daily and monthly
volume by exchange, available here: https://
www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
34 Based on OCC data, see id., in 2019, the
Exchange’s market share in equity-based options
was 9.57% for the month of January 2019 and
9.59% for the month of January 2020.
35 See supra note 14.
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30767
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) 36 of the Act and
subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 37
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) 38 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–2020–44 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–2020–44. 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/
36 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
38 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
37 17
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
30768
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 2020 / Notices
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–2020–44, and should be
submitted on or before June 10, 2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.39
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–10816 Filed 5–19–20; 8:45 am]
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Order Granting Accelerated Approval
of a Proposed Rule Change To Add
FINRA Rule 6800 Series (Consolidated
Audit Trail Compliance Rule) to
FINRA’s Minor Rule Violation Plan
(‘‘MRVP’’)
May 14, 2020.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that, on April 29,
2020, Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed
rule change as described in Items I and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 May 19, 2020
Jkt 250001
FINRA is proposing to add industry
member compliance rules relating to the
Consolidated Audit Trail (‘‘CAT’’) to
FINRA’s Minor Rule Violation Plan
(‘‘MRVP’’).
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on FINRA’s website at
https://www.finra.org, at the principal
office of FINRA 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,
FINRA included statements concerning
the purpose of and basis for the
proposed rule change and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed
rule change. The text of these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. FINRA has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.
1. Purpose
[Release No. 34–88870; File No. SR–FINRA–
2020–013]
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
39 17
II below, which Items have been
prepared by FINRA. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons and approving
the proposal on an accelerated basis.
FINRA Rule 9216(b) provides
procedures for disposition of certain
rule violations designated as minor rule
violations pursuant to a plan declared
effective by the Commission in
accordance with Section 19(d)(1) of the
Act and Rule 19d–1(c)(2) thereunder.
FINRA’s MRVP allows FINRA to impose
a fine of up to $2,500 on any member
or person associated with a member for
a minor violation of an eligible rule.
FINRA Rule 9217 sets forth the rules
eligible for disposition pursuant to
FINRA’s MRVP. FINRA is proposing to
amend Rule 9217 to make minor
violations of the CAT industry member
compliance rules in the Rule 6800
Series eligible for disposition under
FINRA’s MRVP.
The purpose of the MRVP is to
provide reasonable but meaningful
sanctions for minor or technical
violations of rules when the conduct at
issue does not warrant stronger,
immediately reportable disciplinary
sanctions. The inclusion of a rule in
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
FINRA’s MRVP does not minimize the
importance of compliance with the rule,
nor does it preclude FINRA from
choosing to pursue violations of eligible
rules through an Acceptance, Waiver
and Consent (‘‘AWC’’) or Complaint if
the nature of the violations or prior
disciplinary history warrants more
significant sanctions. Rather, the option
to impose an MRVP sanction gives
FINRA additional flexibility to
administer its enforcement program in
the most effective and efficient manner,
while still fully meeting FINRA’s
remedial objectives in addressing
violative conduct. For example, MRVP
dispositions provide a useful tool for
implementing the concept of
progressive discipline to remediate
misconduct.3
With this proposed rule change,
FINRA would add its CAT industry
member compliance rules to its MRVP.
FINRA adopted its CAT industry
member compliance rules in the Rule
6800 Series to implement the National
Market System Plan Governing the
Consolidated Audit Trail (the ‘‘CAT
NMS Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’). The CAT NMS
Plan was filed by the Plan Participants
to comply with Rule 613 of Regulation
NMS under the Exchange Act,4 and
each Plan Participant accordingly has
adopted the same compliance rules that
FINRA has in its Rule 6800 Series. The
common compliance rules adopted by
each Participant are designed to require
industry members to comply with the
provisions of the CAT NMS Plan, which
broadly calls for industry members to
record and report timely and accurate
customer, order, and trade information
relating to activity in NMS Securities
and OTC Equity Securities.
FINRA notes that the CAT industry
member compliance rules are highly
similar to rules already covered in
FINRA’s MRVP. Specifically, the CAT
industry member compliance rules in
the Rule 6800 Series include rules
relating to clock synchronization (Rule
6820), the recording and reporting of
order and trade data (Rules 6830, 6840,
6850, 6860, 6870, 6880, and 6893), and
recordkeeping (Rule 6890). FINRA’s
current MRVP includes the same kinds
of audit trail-related rules relating to
clock synchronization (Rule 4590), the
recording and reporting of order audit
trail data (Rules 7440, 7450), and
recordkeeping (Rule 4510 Series and
SEA Rule 17a–3(a) and 17a–4).
If approved, FINRA plans to employ
the MRVP for CAT compliance rules the
3 See Notice to Members 04–19 (March 2004)
(providing guidance on FINRA’s approach to
progressive discipline under its MRVP).
4 17 CFR 242.613.
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30763-30768]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10816]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-88873; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2020-44]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Modifying the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule Regarding Pricing Incentives for Certain
Posted Volume
May 14, 2020.
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 May 11, 2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Exchange'') 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 modify the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule'') regarding pricing incentives for certain posted
volume. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change effective May
11, 2020.\4\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Exchange originally filed to amend the Fee Schedule on
May 1, 2020 (SR-NYSEArca-2020-41) and withdrew such filing on May
11, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 purpose of this filing is to amend the Fee Schedule to
introduce a new incentive program, and to modify other credits to
encourage a variety of transactions to be executed on the Exchange.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to adopt incentives designed to
increase Firm and Broker Dealer transactions on the Exchange, including
by offering credits based on posted Firm and Broker Dealer volume under
existing and proposed incentive programs, which would increase
available interest on the Exchange to the benefit of all market
participants.\5\ The proposed change would include a ``cross-asset
pricing'' component to incentivize OTP Holders and affiliates to
execute a certain amount of volume on both the Exchange's equities and
options platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Firm and Broker Dealer transactions are included as ``Non-
Customer'' for purpose of fees and credits. See Fee Schedule, NYSE
Arca Options Trade Related Charges For Standard Options, available
here, https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/arca-options/NYSE_Arca_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf (providing that for fee/credit
purposes, Firms, Broker Dealers, and Market Makers are considered
``Non-Customers'' and, unless otherwise specified, Professional
Customers are considered ``Customers'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes on May 11, 2020.
Background
The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS,
the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system
[[Page 30764]]
``has been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (``Reg NMS
Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are currently 16 registered options exchanges competing for
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding
index-based options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market
share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options
trades.\7\ Therefore, currently no exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity & ETF options
order flow. More specifically, in January 2020, the Exchange had less
than 10% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity &
ETF options trades.\8\ Similarly, the equities markets also face stark
competition, which is relevant because the Exchange may offer ``cross-
asset pricing,'' which is designed to incent participants to execute a
certain amount of volume on both the Exchange's equities and options
platform. As the Commission itself recognized, the market for trading
services in NMS stocks has become ``more fragmented and competitive.''
\9\ Indeed, equity trading is currently dispersed across 13
exchanges,\10\ 31 alternative trading systems,\11\ and numerous broker-
dealer internalizers and wholesalers, all competing for order flow.
Based on publicly-available information, no single exchange has more
than 18% market share (whether including or excluding auction
volume).\12\ Therefore, currently no single exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of equity order flow. More
specifically, the Exchange's market share of trading in Tapes A, B and
C securities combined is less than 10%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety of
formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange, available
here: https://www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
\8\ Based on OCC data, see id., in 2019, the Exchange's market
share in equity-based options was 9.57% for the month of January
2019 and 9.59% for the month of January 2020.
\9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84875 (December 19,
2018), 84 FR 5202, 5253 (February 20, 2019) (File No. S7-05-18)
(Transaction Fee Pilot for NMS Stocks Final Rule).
\10\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, available here https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/. See generally https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/divisionsmarketregmrexchangesshtml.html.
\11\ See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available here: https://otctransparency.finra.org/otctransparency/AtsIssueData. A list of
alternative trading systems registered with the Commission is
available at https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/atslist.htm.
\12\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, available here: https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products. To respond to this competitive marketplace, the Exchange has
established incentives--or posting credit tiers--designed to encourage
OTP Holders and OTP Firms (collectively, ``OTP Holders'') to direct
additional order flow to the Exchange to achieve more favorable pricing
and higher credits. The Exchange incentives also include ``cross-asset
pricing,'' which allows OTP Holders to aggregate their options and
equity volume with affiliated or appointed Order Flow Providers
(``OFPs'') (collectively referred to as affiliates herein), making the
NYSE Arca a more attractive trading venue.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Fee Schedule, Endnote 15 (providing that an ``Appointed
MM'' is an NYSE Arca Market Maker designated as such by an Order
Flow Provider (``OFP'') (as defined in NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A-O(a)(21))
and ``Appointed OFP'' is an OFP been designated as such by an NYSE
Arca Market Maker).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to modify its existing posting credit tiers
and adopt a new posting credit tier program that would offer more
favorable rates for increased Firm and Broker Dealer volume beyond
certain minimum thresholds. The Exchange also proposes a related new
incentive program that incorporates cross-asset pricing for OTP Holders
that meet minimum Firm and Broker Dealer volume thresholds. The
proposed change should encourage OTP Holders to increase their
participation on the Exchange, thereby improving the quoted markets and
attracting more order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange notes that the
proposed change would be competitive with other options exchanges that
offer pricing incentive for Firm and Broker Dealer volume as well as
cross-asset pricing incentives.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See, e.g., Cboe BZX Options Exchange Fee Schedule,
available here, https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/ (setting forth posting volume tiers for Firm and
Broker Dealer volume in Penny Pilot Issues); Cboe BZX U.S. Equities
Exchange Fee Schedule, Footnote 1 and Cboe EDGX Options Exchange Fee
Schedule, Footnote 4 (regarding cross-asset pricing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule Change
Firm and Broker Dealer Incentives
The Exchange proposes to adopt a new incentive program that would
provide increasing levels of credit for posted Firm and Broker Dealer
interest in Penny Pilot issues (the ``FBD Posting Incentive'').\15\ The
Exchange currently provides a $0.10 per contract credit on electronic
executions of Firm and Broker Dealer posted interest in Penny Pilot
issues, and proposes to include this $0.10 credit in the FBD Posting
Incentive table for reference only.\16\ As proposed, OTP Holders that
execute at least 0.15% of Total Customer Average Daily Volume
(``TCADV'') \17\ from Firm and Broker Dealer posted interest in all
issues, which would qualify them for the Tier 1 level under the
proposed FBD Posting Incentive, would receive a per contract credit of
$0.25. OTP Holders that execute at least 0.30% of TCADV from Firm and
Broker Dealer posted interest in all issues, which would qualify them
for the Tier 2 level under the proposed FBD Posting Incentive, would
receive a per contract of $0.35. As is the case with current posting
credit tiers, OTP Holders may aggregate their volume with affiliated
OTPs to achieve the proposed credits.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See proposed Fee Schedule, FIRM AND BROKER DEALER PENNY
PILOT POSTING CREDIT TIERS (providing in the preamble that ``OTP
Holders and OTP Firms meeting the qualifications below will receive
the corresponding credit on all electronic executions of Firm and
Broker Dealer posted interest in Penny Pilot Issues'').
\16\ See Fee Schedule, id.; see also TRANSACTION FEE FOR
ELECTRONIC EXECUTIONS--PER CONTRACT (referring in both places to
same $0.10 credit on Firm Broker Dealer transactions).
\17\ TCADV includes OCC calculated Customer volume of all types,
including Complex Order Transactions and QCC transactions, in equity
and ETF options. See Fee Schedule, Endnote 8.
\18\ See proposed Fee Schedule, Endnotes 8 (providing that the
proposed incentives will include the activity of affiliates) and 15
(defining affiliates referenced in Endnote 8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes that OTP Holders that qualify for either
the Tier 1 or Tier 2 FBD Posting Incentive described above may earn the
greater of one of the following additional credits.\19\ The first
alternative of the proposed ``Firm and Broker Dealer Incentive
Program'' would be a cross-asset incentive that would provide an
additional $0.03 per contract credit to OTP Holders that execute at
least 0.30% ADV of U.S Equity Tape C Market Share Posted and Executed
on NYSE Arca Tape C Equity Market. The second alternative would provide
an additional $0.05 per contract credit to OTP Holders that execute at
least 0.85% of TCADV of posted interest in all issues across all
account types, of which at least 0.60% TCADV is from Firm and Broker
Dealer
[[Page 30765]]
posted interest. If an OTP Holder qualifies for both additional
credits, they would earn the greater of the two additional credits, not
both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See proposed Fee Schedule, Firm and Broker Dealer Incentive
Program (providing that OTP Holders ``that qualify for Tier 1 or
Tier 2 Firm and Broker-Dealer Penny Pilot Posting Credit Tiers may
earn the greater of the alternative additional credits listed
above'' and referencing Endnotes 8 and 15).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To further encourage Firm and Broker dealer volume, the Exchange
also proposes to add alternative qualification bases to the existing
posting tiers set forth in both the Non-Customer, Non-Penny Pilot
Posting Credit Tiers and the Customer and Professional Customer Posting
Credit Tiers in Non-Penny Pilot Issues. As noted above, an OTP Holder
that executes at least 0.15% of TCADV from Firm and Broker Dealer
posted interest in all issues (the ``FirmBD Threshold'') qualifies for
Tier 1 of the proposed Firm and Broker Dealer Posting Credit Tiers. The
Exchange proposes to add a new Tier to the Non-Customer, Non-Penny
Pilot Posting Credit Tiers, and amend existing Tier A to the Customer
and Professional Customer Posting Credit Tiers in Non-Penny Pilot
Issues, to provide that if an OTP Holder that meets the FirmBD
Threshold and also executes at least 0.10% TCADV from Customer posted
interest in all issues, that OTP Holder would qualify for the following
per contract credits on electronic executions (the ``CustFirmBD
Threshold''):
A $0.62 per contract credit from non-Customer posted
interest in non-Penny Pilot issues, as proposed alternative
qualification to new Tier 3 of the Non-Customer, Non-Penny Pilot
Posting Credit Tiers; and
A $0.85 per contract credit from Customer posted interest
in non-Penny Pilot issues, as proposed alternative qualification to
Tier A of Customer and Professional Customer Posting Credit Tiers in
Non-Penny Issues.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The Exchange notes that the $0.85 per contract credit would
be an increase (from $0.83) to the existing Tier A qualification
basis that an OTP Holder execute ``[a]t least 0.80% of TCADV from
Customer posted interest in all issues.'' See Fee Schedule, Customer
Posting Credit Tiers in Non-Penny Issues. The Exchange proposes to
remove reference to Professional Customer from the column heading
given that such transactions are treated the same as Customer, which
change would add clarity, transparency and internal consistency to
the Fee Schedule making it easier to navigate. See proposed Fee
Schedule, CUSTOMER POSTING CREDIT TIERS IN NON-PENNY PILOT ISSUES
(with updated column title ``Customer Posting Credit Tiers In Non-
Penny Pilot Issues'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Penny and Non-Customer Non-Penny Volume Incentives
The Exchange also proposes additional modifications to the existing
posting credit tier qualification thresholds and credits to encourage
diverse order flow.
First, the Exchange proposes to modify the existing qualifications
for Tier 2 under the Customer Penny Pilot Posting Credit Tiers by
replacing the existing alternative qualification, which requires an OTP
Holder to have at least 0.70% of TCADV from posted interest in Penny
Pilot Issues in all account types, with a new proposed Tier 2
alternative that would require an OTP Holder to increase or step-up
posted interest in all issues, all account types other than Market
Maker by at least 0.15% of TCADV over its March 2020 level of posted
interest in all issues, all account types other than Market Maker.\21\
The amount of the contract credit for Tier 2 would not change. The
Exchange notes that although it has deleted the existing Tier 2
alternative qualification basis, an OTP Holder can still aim to achieve
credits based on posted interest in Penny Pilot Issues under Tier 4,
which has a slightly higher (0.85%) minimum qualification basis.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See proposed Fee Schedule, CUSTOMER PENNY PILOT POSTING
CREDIT TIERS. As an example: If TCADV for the month of May 2020 is
1,500,000 contracts, then 0.15% of the TCADV would be 2,250
contracts. Assume an OTP Holder had an ADV in March 2020 of 11,000
contracts from posted Customer and Non-Customer interest (excluding
Market Maker interest). To qualify for Tier 2 under this
alternative, the OTP Holder would have to increase its posted
Customer and Non Customer volumes (exclusive of Market Maker
interest) by at least 2,250 contracts ADV, to a minimum level of
13,250 contracts ADV.
\22\ See Fee Schedule, CUSTOMER PENNY PILOT POSTING CREDIT
TIERS, Tier 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes to modify the Non-Customer, Non-Penny
Pilot Posting Credit Tiers by introducing a new Tier 3 with two
alternatives to qualify for the proposed credit. As described above,
OTP Holders can qualify for a $0.62 per contract credit in proposed
Tier 3 by achieving the CustFirmBD Threshold. As an alternative, OTP
Holders can qualify for the same Tier 3 credit by executing at least
0.15% of TCADV from non-Customer posted interest in all non-Penny
issues. In addition, current Tier 3 would become new Tier 4, and the
qualification threshold for that tier would be increased to require at
least 0.25% of TCADV (up from 0.20%) from Non-Customer posted interest
in all non-Penny Issues and the per contract credit of $0.82 would
remain unchanged.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See proposed Fee Schedule, NON-CUSTOMER, NON-PENNY PILOT
POSTING CREDIT TIERS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes the proposed changes to the posting tiers are
reasonable because OTP Holders (and their affiliates) can bring a
variety of order flow to the Exchange, which may result in an increase
volume and liquidity on both its options and equites platforms. The
Exchange's fees are constrained by intermarket competition, as OTP
Holders may direct their order flow to any of the 16 options exchanges,
including those with similar posting incentives.\24\ The proposed
cross-asset pricing is designed to encourage participants to (continue
to) conduct trading in both options and equities on the Exchange. The
Exchange notes that all market participants stand to benefit from
increased transaction volume, which promotes market depth, facilitates
tighter spreads and enhances price discovery, and may lead to a
corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange cannot predict with certainty whether any OTP Holders
would avail themselves of this proposed fee change by achieving any of
the qualifications. At present, whether or when an OTP Holder qualifies
for the various incentive Tiers in a given month is dependent on market
activity and an OTP Holder's mix of order flow. Thus, the Exchange
cannot predict with any certainty the number of OTP Holders that may
qualify for the various proposed tiers--especially because the proposed
credits for Firm and Broker Dealer volume would be new. However, the
Exchange believes that OTP Holders would be encouraged to take
advantage of the newly adopted and modified credits.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\25\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\26\ in particular,
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Proposed Rule Change Is Reasonable
The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its
[[Page 30766]]
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 6, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are currently 16 registered options exchanges competing for
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding
index-based options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market
share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options
trades.\28\ Therefore, currently no exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity & ETF options
order flow. More specifically, in January 2020, the Exchange had less
than 10% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity &
ETF options trades.\29\ In addition, by including the cross-asset
pricing in the Firm and Broker Dealer Incentive Program, it is
important to note that the equities market is likewise subject to stark
competition. As the Commission itself recognized, the market for
trading services in NMS stocks has become ``more fragmented and
competitive.'' \30\ Indeed, equity trading is currently dispersed
across 13 exchanges, 32 alternative trading systems, and numerous
broker-dealer internalizers and wholesalers, all competing for order
flow. Based on publicly-available information, no single exchange has
more than 18% market share (whether including or excluding auction
volume). Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power in
the execution of equity order flow. More specifically, the Exchange's
market share of trading in Tapes A, B, and C securities combined is
less than 1%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety
of formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange,
available here: https://www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
\29\ Based on OCC data, see id., in 2019, the Exchange's market
share in equity-based options was 9.57% for the month of January
2019 and 9.59% for the month of January 2020.
\30\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain options exchange transaction fees. Stated otherwise, changes
to exchange transaction fees can have a direct effect on the ability of
an exchange to compete for order flow.
The proposed changes are designed to incent OTP Holders to transact
more options (and equities) volume on the Exchange. The FBD Posting
Incentive is designed to encourage OTP Holders to increase the Firm and
Broker dealer volume sent to the Exchange for execution. The Firm and
Broker Dealer Incentive Program, which will be available to
participants that qualify for the FBD Posting Incentive, would
encourage increased equity market participation by OTP Holders and
their affiliates. The Exchange believes this should increase volume and
liquidity--on both its options and equites platforms--to the benefit of
all market participants by providing more trading opportunities and
tighter spreads, and may lead to a corresponding increase in order flow
from other market participants.
Further, the proposed FBD Posting Incentive and related cross-asset
pricing incentive are similar to and competitive with posting credit
tiers for Firm and Broker Dealer volume and cross-asset pricing offered
by other exchanges and is designed to attract (and compete for) order
flow to the Exchange, which provides a greater opportunity for trading
by all market participants.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed change to add new posting
tiers as well as to modify thresholds and credits available under
existing posting credit tiers would incent OTP Holders to increase the
number and variety orders sent to the Exchange for execution. Further,
the Exchange notes that it continues to provide OTP Holders alternative
methods (and thus increased opportunities) to qualify for posting
credits and pricing incentives, resulting in favorable rates for a
variety of order types. As such, OTP Holders would be encouraged to
increase their participation on the Exchange, thereby improving the
quoted markets and attracting more order flow to the Exchange. To the
extent that the proposed change attracts more order flow to the
Exchange, this increased order flow would continue to make the Exchange
a more competitive venue for order execution, which, in turn, promotes
just and equitable principles of trade and removes impediments to and
perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system.
Finally, to the extent the proposed change continues to attract
greater volume and liquidity, the Exchange believes the proposed change
would improve the Exchange's overall competitiveness and strengthen its
market quality for all market participants. In the backdrop of the
competitive environment in which the Exchange operates, the proposed
rule change is a reasonable attempt by the Exchange to increase the
depth of its market and improve its market share relative to its
competitors.
The Exchange cannot predict with certainty whether any OTP Holders
would avail themselves of this proposed fee change. At present, whether
or when an OTP Holder qualifies for the various incentive Tiers in a
given month is dependent on market activity and an OTP Holders mix of
order flow. Thus, the Exchange cannot predict with any certainty the
number of OTP Holders that may qualify for the various proposed tiers--
especially because the credits for Firm and Broker Dealer volume is
brand new. However, the Exchange believes that OTP Holders would be
encouraged to take advantage of the newly adopted and modified credits.
The Proposed Rule Change Is an Equitable Allocation of Credits and Fees
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is an equitable
allocation of its fees and credits. The proposal is based on the amount
and type of business transacted on the Exchange and OTP Holders can opt
to avail themselves of the incentives or not. Moreover, the proposal is
designed to encourage OTP Holders to submit orders from all account
types to the Exchange as a primary execution venue. To the extent that
the proposed change attracts more Firm and Broker Dealer orders to the
Exchange, this increased order flow would continue to make the Exchange
a more competitive venue for order execution. Thus, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change would improve market quality for all
market participants on the Exchange and, as a consequence, attract more
order flow to the Exchange thereby improving market-wide quality and
price discovery.
The Proposed Rule Change Is not Unfairly Discriminatory
The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to
introduce the various Tiers because the proposed modifications would be
available to all similarly-situated market participants on an equal and
non-discriminatory basis.
The proposal is based on the amount and type of business transacted
on the Exchange and OTP Holders are not obligated to try to achieve the
qualifications for any of the tiers, nor are they obligated to execute
Firm and Broker Dealer orders. Rather, the proposal is designed
encourage OTP Holders to utilize the Exchange as a primary trading
venue for Firm and
[[Page 30767]]
Broker Dealer Executions (if they have not done so previously) or
increase volume sent to the Exchange. To the extent that the proposed
change attracts more Firm and Broker Dealer orders to the Exchange,
this increased order flow would continue to make the Exchange a more
competitive venue for, among other things, order execution. Thus, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change would improve market quality
for all market participants on the Exchange and, as a consequence,
attract more order flow to the Exchange thereby improving market-wide
quality and price discovery. The resulting increased volume and
liquidity would provide more trading opportunities and tighter spreads
to all market participants and thus would promote just and equitable
principles of trade, 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.
Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for all market participants. As a result, the Exchange believes that
the proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting
Regulation NMS of fostering integrated competition among orders, which
promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of
orders, large and small.'' \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 6, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is designed to attract
additional order flow (particularly Firm and Broker Dealer orders) to
the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed FBD Posting
Incentive, and related cross-asset pricing, would encourage market
participants to direct a variety of order flow to the Exchange,
including Firm and Broker Dealer execution volume to the Exchange.
Greater liquidity benefits all market participants on the Exchange and
increased Firm and Broker Dealer transactions would increase
opportunities for execution of other trading interest. The proposed
change would be available to all similarly-situated market participants
(including those that handle Firm and Broker Dealer order flow), and,
as such, the proposed change would not impose a disparate burden on
competition among market participants on the Exchange.
Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor one
of the 16 competing option exchanges if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges and to attract order flow to the Exchange. Based on publicly-
available information, and excluding index-based options, no single
exchange has more than 16% of the market share of executed volume of
multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades.\33\ Therefore, currently
no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of
multiply-listed equity & ETF options order flow. More specifically, in
January 2020, the Exchange had less than 10% market share of executed
volume of multiply-listed equity & ETF options trades.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety
of formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange,
available here: https://www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
\34\ Based on OCC data, see id., in 2019, the Exchange's market
share in equity-based options was 9.57% for the month of January
2019 and 9.59% for the month of January 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment because it modifies the Exchange's fees in a
manner designed to encourage OTP Holders (and affiliates) to direct
trading interest (particularly Firm and Broker Dealer order flow) to
the Exchange, to provide liquidity and to attract order flow. To the
extent that this purpose is achieved, all the Exchange's market
participants should benefit from the improved market quality and
increased opportunities for price improvement.
The Exchange believes that the proposed change could promote
competition between the Exchange and other execution venues, including
those that currently offer similar incentives, by encouraging
additional orders to be sent to the Exchange for execution.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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) \36\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \37\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\37\ 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) \38\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 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-2020-44 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-2020-44. 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/
[[Page 30768]]
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-2020-44, and should be
submitted on or before June 10, 2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-10816 Filed 5-19-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P