Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Amend Its Fees Schedule, 83115-83118 [2020-28009]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices
last minute shareholder redemptions by
SPACs that are close to the minimum
requirement. The Exchange also has not
addressed the risk that, by waiting for
SPACs to demonstrate compliance with
the minimum number of holders
requirements until after the closing of
the business combination, noncompliant companies could be listed on
the Exchange despite not meeting initial
listing standards, and have their
securities continue to trade until the
delisting process has been completed.
As a result, a SPAC could complete a
business combination and very soon
thereafter be subject to delisting
proceedings, and during such time its
securities may trade with a number of
holders that is substantially less than
the required minimum. The Exchange
has not addressed the impact this could
have on SPAC shareholders and other
market participants, or explained why
subjecting them to these risks is
consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, and
the other requirements of Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act.
Under the Commission’s Rules of
Practice, the ‘‘burden to demonstrate
that a proposed rule change is
consistent with the Exchange Act and
the rules and regulations issued
thereunder . . . is on the self-regulatory
organization [‘SRO’] that proposed the
rule change.’’ 21 The description of a
proposed rule change, its purpose and
operation, its effect, and a legal analysis
of its consistency with applicable
requirements must all be sufficiently
detailed and specific to support an
affirmative Commission finding, and
any failure of an SRO to provide this
information may result in the
Commission not having a sufficient
basis to make an affirmative finding that
a proposed rule change is consistent
with the Exchange Act and the
applicable rules and regulations.22
For these reasons, the Commission
believes it is appropriate to institute
proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to determine
whether the proposal should be
approved or disapproved.
IV. Procedure: Request for Written
Comments
The Commission requests that
interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and
arguments with respect to the issues
identified above, as well as any other
concerns they may have with the
proposal. In particular, the Commission
21 Rule 700(b)(3), Commission Rules of Practice,
17 CFR 201.700(b)(3).
22 See id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:33 Dec 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
invites the written views of interested
persons concerning whether the
proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) or any other provision of the Act,
or the rules and regulations thereunder.
Although there do not appear to be any
issues relevant to approval or
disapproval that would be facilitated by
an oral presentation of views, data, and
arguments, the Commission will
consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4, any
request for an opportunity to make an
oral presentation.23
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the
proposal should be approved or
disapproved by January 11, 2021. Any
person who wishes to file a rebuttal to
any other person’s submission must file
that rebuttal by January 25, 2021. The
Commission asks that commenters
address the sufficiency of the
Exchange’s statements in support of the
proposal, in addition to any other
comments they may wish to submit
about the proposed rule change.
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–
NASDAQ–2020–062 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–NASDAQ–2020–062. 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
23 Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the
Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law
94–29 (June 4, 1975), grants the Commission
flexibility to determine what type of proceeding—
either oral or notice and opportunity for written
comments—is appropriate for consideration of a
particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of
1975, Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing & Urban
Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30
(1975).
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
83115
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–NASDAQ–2020–062 and
should be submitted by January 11,
2021. Rebuttal comments should be
submitted by January 25, 2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.24
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–28066 Filed 12–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–90676; File No. SR–CBOE–
2020–114]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe
Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change Relating To Amend Its
Fees Schedule
December 15, 2020.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on December
1, 2020, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘Cboe Options’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have
been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
24 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(57).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM
21DEN1
83116
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ‘‘Exchange’’
or ‘‘Cboe Options’’) proposes to amend
its Fees Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is provided in
Exhibit 5.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website
(https://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/
CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at
the Exchange’s Office of the Secretary,
and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend
certain routing fees in connection with
routed Customer orders in ETF and
equity options, effective December 1,
2020.
The Exchange notes that it operates in
a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily direct
order flow to competing venues if they
deem fee levels at a particular venue to
be excessive or incentives to be
insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 options
venues to which market participants
may direct their order flow. Based on
publicly available information, no single
options exchange has more than 16% of
the market share.3 Thus, in such a lowconcentrated and highly competitive
market, no single options exchange
possesses significant pricing power in
the execution of option order flow. The
Exchange believes that the ever-shifting
market share among the exchanges from
month to month demonstrates that
market participants can shift order flow
3 See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Monthly
Market Volume Summary (November 23, 2020),
available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/
market_statistics/.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:33 Dec 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
or discontinue to reduce use of certain
categories of products in response to fee
changes. Accordingly, competitive
forces constrain the Exchange’s
transaction fees, and market participants
can readily trade on competing venues
if they deem pricing levels at those
other venues to be more favorable. In
response to competitive pricing, the
Exchange, like other options exchanges,
offers rebates and assesses fees for
certain order types executed on or
routed through the Exchange. The
Exchange notes too that other options
exchanges currently approximate
routing fees in a similar manner as the
Exchange’s current approach to
assessing approximate routing fees, as
discussed below.4
The Exchange assesses fees in
connection with orders routed away to
various exchanges. Currently, under the
Routing Fees table of the Fee Schedule,
fee codes RD, RE, RF, RG, RH and RI are
appended to certain Customer orders in
ETF and Equity options, as follows:
• Fee code RD is appended to
Customer orders in ETF/Equity options 5
for greater than or equal to 100 contracts
routed to NYSE American (‘‘AMEX’’),
BOX Options Exchange (‘‘BOX’’),
Nasdaq BX Options (‘‘BX’’), Cboe EDGX
Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGX’’), ISE Mercury,
LLC (‘‘MERC’’), MIAX Options
Exchange (‘‘MIAX’’) or Nasdaq PHLX
LLC (‘‘PHLX’’), and assesses a charge of
$0.33 per contract;
• fee code RE is appended to
Customer orders in ETF/Equity options
for less than 100 contracts routed to
AMEX, BOX, BX, EDGX, MERC, MIAX
or PHLX, and assesses a charge of $0.15
per contract;
• fee code RF is appended to
Customer orders in ETF/Equity, Penny
options for greater than or equal to 100
contracts routed to NYSE Arca, Inc
(‘‘ARCA’’), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.
(‘‘BZX’’), Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (‘‘C2’’),
Nasdaq ISE (‘‘ISE’’), ISE Gemini, LLC
(‘‘GMNI’’), MIAX Emerald Exchange
(‘‘EMLD’’), MIAX Pearl Exchange
(‘‘PERL’’) or Nasdaq Options Market
4 See e.g., NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges,
‘‘Routing Fees’’, which provides routing fees of
‘‘$0.11 per contract on orders routed and executed
on another exchange, plus (i) any transaction fees
assessed by the away exchange (calculated on an
order-by-order basis since different away exchanges
charge different amounts) or (ii) if the actual
transaction fees assessed by the away exchange(s)
cannot be determined prior to the execution, the
highest per contract charge assessed by the away
exchange(s) for the relevant option class and type
of market participant (e.g., Customer, Firm, Broker/
Dealer, Professional Customer or Market Maker).’’
5 The Exchange also updates fee codes RD and RF
to make clear that ‘‘equity’’ options are included in
the description. The System currently applies the
applicable routing fee codes (RD, RE, RF, RG and
RH) to both ETF and equity options.
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
LLC (‘‘NOMX), and assesses a charge of
$0.83 per contract;
• fee code RG is appended to
Customer orders in ETF/Equity, NonPenny options for greater than or equal
to 100 contracts routed to ARCA, BZX,
C2, ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX,
and assesses a charge of $1.18 per
contract;
• fee code RH is appended to
Customer orders in ETF/Equity, Penny
options for less than 100 contracts
routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI,
EMLD, PERL or NOMX, and assesses a
charge of $0.65 per contract; and
• fee code RI is appended to
Customer order in ETF/Equity, NonPenny options for less than 100
contracts routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE,
GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX, and
assesses a charge of $1.00 per contract.
The Exchange proposes to remove fee
codes RE, RG and RH and amend fee
codes RD, RF and RI by removing the
100-contract size limit from each and
updating the fees assessed to $0.25 per
contract, $0.75 per contract and $1.25
per contract, respectively. The Exchange
believes that eliminating fee codes RE,
RG and RH and the 100-contract
contingency currently applicable to
orders that yield fee codes RD, RF and
RI will simplify and streamline the
System’s billing process for routed
Customer orders in ETF and equity
options. By removing the size
contingency, orders to which RE, RG
and RH are currently applicable may
then be absorbed into orders to which
RD, RF and RI are currently applicable
and the routing fees for Customer orders
in ETF and equity options may be billed
as one of three fee codes, instead of six.
For example, fee code RG would, prior
to this proposal, be appended to
Customer orders in ETF/Equity NonPenny options for 100 contracts or more
routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI,
EMLD, PERL or NOMX. However,
without the size contingency, RI will
now be appended to all Customer orders
in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options
routed to the same away exchanges.
Regarding the proposed rate changes for
the remaining Customer ETF/Equity
routing fee codes (RD, RF and RI), the
Exchange notes that its current
approach to routing fees is to set forth
in a simple manner certain subcategories of fees that approximate the
cost of routing to other options
exchanges based on the cost of
transaction fees assessed by each venue
as well as a flat $0.15 assessment that
covers costs to the Exchange for routing
(i.e., clearing fees, connectivity and
other infrastructure costs, membership
fees, etc.) (collectively, ‘‘Routing
Costs’’). The Exchange then monitors
E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM
21DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices
the fees charged as compared to the
costs of its routing services and adjusts
its routing fees and/or sub-categories to
ensure that the Exchange’s fees do
indeed result in a rough approximation
of overall Routing Costs, and are not
significantly higher or lower in any area.
As a result, the Exchange believes the
proposed amended rates for RD, RF and
RI are adjusted to reflect an appropriate,
current approximation of the routing
costs to the applicable sub-category
group of away exchanges for ETF/Equity
options of any order size, and these
routing fee codes will absorb the orders
to which RE, RG and RH are currently
appended. The Exchange notes that
routing through the Exchange is
optional and that TPHs will continue to
be able to choose where to route their
Customer orders in ETF and equity
options.
The Exchange also proposes to update
routing fee codes RD and RF in the
Routing Fees table of the Fees Schedule
connection with routed Customer orders
in SPY options to Nasdaq PHLX LLC
(‘‘PHLX’’). As described above, routing
fee code RD is appended to Customer
orders in ETF/Equity options routed to
AMEX, BOX, BX, EDGX, MERC, MIAX
or PHLX and assesses a charge of $0.25
per contract (as proposed), and routing
fee code RF is appended to Customer
orders in ETF options in Penny classes
routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI,
EMLD, PERL, NOMX or PHLX and
assesses a charge of $0.75 per contract
(as proposed). Currently, PHLX assesses
a charge of $0.42 per contract for
Customer orders in SPY options that
remove liquidity.6 As described above,
the Exchange currently assesses a
routing fee of $0.33 per contract for
Customer orders routed to PHLX which
yield fee code RP. This structure does
not currently take into account, and
approximately cover, the $0.42 per
contract fee assessed by PHLX for
Customer orders in SPY options.
Therefore, in order to assess fees more
in line with the Exchange’s current
approach to routing fees, that is, in a
manner that approximates the cost of
routing Customer orders in SPY options
to PHLX, along with other away options
exchanges, based on the general cost of
transaction fees assessed by the subcategory of away options exchanges for
such orders (as well as the Exchange’s
routing costs), the Exchange proposes to
exclude Customer orders is SPY options
routed to PHLX from orders that yield
fee code RD and are assessed a charge
of $0.25 per contract (as proposed) and,
6 See Nasdaq Phlx Options 7 Pricing Schedule,
Section 3 ‘‘Rebates and Fees for Adding and
Removing Liquidity in SPY’’, Part A.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:33 Dec 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
instead, add Customer orders routed to
PHLX in SPY options only to orders that
yield fee code RF 7 and are assessed a
charge of $0.75 per contract (as
proposed).
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed
rule change is consistent with the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to the Exchange
and, in particular, the requirements of
Section 6(b) of the Act.8 Specifically,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) 9 requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged
in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,10 which
requires that Exchange rules provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges among its
Trading Permit Holders and other
persons using its facilities.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change to remove fee
codes RE, RG and RH and remove the
size contingency for fee codes RD, RF
and RI is reasonable in that it is
reasonably designed to simplify and
streamline the System’s billing process
for routed Customer orders in ETF and
equity options. By removing the size
contingency, orders to which fee codes
RE, RG and RH are currently applicable
may then be absorbed into the orders to
which fee codes RD, RF and RI are
applicable and the routing fees for
Customer orders in ETF and equity
options may be billed as one of three fee
codes, instead of six. The Exchange also
believes that it is reasonable to amend
the rates that correspond to fee codes
RD, RF and RI because the proposed
rates are aligned with the Exchange’s
current approach to approximating the
cost of routing to other options
exchanges based on the cost of
transaction fees assessed by each venue
7 The Exchange notes that SPY options are part
of the Penny Program.
8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
83117
as well as the Exchange’s Routing Cost.
The Exchange believes the proposed
amended rates for orders that yield fee
codes RD, RF and RI are adjusted to
reasonably reflect an appropriate,
current approximation of the routing
costs for ETF/Equity options of any
order size to the sub-category group of
away exchanges, and these routing fee
codes will absorb the orders to which
fee codes RE, RG and RH are currently
appended. For example, routed
Customer orders in ETF/Equity NonPenny options that yield fee code RG
(greater than or equal to 100 contracts)
are currently assessed a routing fee of
$1.18 per contract, while routed
Customer orders in ETF/Equity NonPenny options that yield fee code RH
(less than 100 contracts) are currently
assessed a routing fee of $1.00.
However, upon the removal of fee code
RG, those routed Customer orders in
ETF/Equity Non-Penny options will
yield fee code RH, which will assess a
proposed fee of $1.25, which the
Exchange believes is appropriately
adjusted to reflect the current
approximate cost of routing Customer
orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny
options of all sizes to the same subcategory group of away exchanges. The
Exchange notes that routing through the
Exchange is optional and that TPHs will
continue to be able to choose where to
route their Customer orders in ETF and
equity options in the same sub-category
group of away exchanges as they
currently may choose to route. The
Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because TPHs’ routed
Customer orders in ETF/Equity options
will continue to be automatically and
uniformly assessed the applicable
routing charges.
The Exchange believes the proposed
rule change to amend fee codes RD and
RF to account for PHLX’s current
assessment of fees for Customer orders
in SPY options is reasonable because it
is reasonably designed to assess routing
fees in line with the Exchange’s current
approach to routing fees. That is, the
proposed rule change is intended to
include Customer orders in SPY options
routed to PHLX in the most appropriate
sub-category of fees that approximates
the cost of routing to a group of away
options exchanges (including PHLX)
based on the cost of transaction fees
assessed by each venue as well as
Routing Costs to the Exchange. The
Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because all TPHs’
Customer orders in SPY routed to PHLX
will automatically yield fee code RQ
E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM
21DEN1
83118
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices
and uniformly be assessed the
corresponding fee.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on intramarket or
intermarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange does not believe the
proposed rule change to remove certain
routing fee codes and to update other
routing fee codes accordingly to apply
instead, will impose any burden on
intramarket competition because all
TPHs’ routed Customer orders in ETF/
Equity options will continue to be able
to route to the same sub-category group
of away exchanges and will
automatically and uniformly be assessed
the applicable routing fees. Likewise, all
TPH’s Customer orders in SPY options
routed to PHLX will automatically yield
fee code RF and uniformly be assessed
the corresponding fee.
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule changes in connection
with routing fees will impose any
burden on intermarket competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because, as previously discussed, the
Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market. The Exchange notes
that other options exchanges
approximate routing costs in a similar
manner as the Exchange’s current
approach.11 Also, the Exchange notes
that, in addition to Cboe Options, TPHs
have numerous alternative venues that
they may participate on and director
their order flow, including 15 other
options exchanges, as well as offexchange venues, where competitive
products are available for trading. Based
on publicly available information, no
single options exchange has more than
16% of the market share of executed
volume of options trades.12 Therefore,
no exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of option
order flow. Moreover, the Commission
has repeatedly expressed its preference
for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities
markets. Specifically, 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
11 See
supra note 4.
12 See supra note 3.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:33 Dec 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.’’ 13 The
fact that this market is competitive has
also long been recognized by the courts.
In NetCoalition v. Securities and
Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit
stated as follows: ‘‘[n]o one disputes
that competition for order flow is
‘fierce.’ . . . As the SEC explained, ‘[i]n
the U.S. national market system, buyers
and sellers of securities, and the brokerdealers that act as their order-routing
agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution’;
[and] ‘no exchange can afford to take its
market share percentages for granted’
because ‘no exchange possesses a
monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in
the execution of order flow from broker
dealers’. . . .’’ 14 Accordingly, the
Exchange does not believe its proposed
changes to the incentive programs
impose any burden on competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor
received comments on the proposed
rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
of the Act 15 and paragraph (f) of Rule
19b–4 16 thereunder, because it
establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the Exchange.
At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. If the
Commission takes such action, the
Commission will institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or
disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
13 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
14 NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C.
Cir. 2010) (quoting Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782–
83 (December 9, 2008) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21)).
15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
16 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f).
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
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–2020–114 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–2020–114. 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;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–CBOE–
2020–114 and should be submitted on
or before January 11, 2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.17
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–28009 Filed 12–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
17 17
E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
21DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 245 (Monday, December 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83115-83118]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28009]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-90676; File No. SR-CBOE-2020-114]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
To Amend Its Fees Schedule
December 15, 2020.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 1, 2020, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``Cboe Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 83116]]
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website (https://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx),
at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's
Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend certain routing fees in connection
with routed Customer orders in ETF and equity options, effective
December 1, 2020.
The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily direct order flow to competing
venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive or
incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the Exchange is only
one of 16 options venues to which market participants may direct their
order flow. Based on publicly available information, no single options
exchange has more than 16% of the market share.\3\ Thus, in such a low-
concentrated and highly competitive market, no single options exchange
possesses significant pricing power in the execution of option order
flow. 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 to reduce use of certain categories
of products in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain the Exchange's transaction fees, and market participants can
readily trade on competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those
other venues to be more favorable. In response to competitive pricing,
the Exchange, like other options exchanges, offers rebates and assesses
fees for certain order types executed on or routed through the
Exchange. The Exchange notes too that other options exchanges currently
approximate routing fees in a similar manner as the Exchange's current
approach to assessing approximate routing fees, as discussed below.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Monthly Market Volume
Summary (November 23, 2020), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
\4\ See e.g., NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges, ``Routing
Fees'', which provides routing fees of ``$0.11 per contract on
orders routed and executed on another exchange, plus (i) any
transaction fees assessed by the away exchange (calculated on an
order-by-order basis since different away exchanges charge different
amounts) or (ii) if the actual transaction fees assessed by the away
exchange(s) cannot be determined prior to the execution, the highest
per contract charge assessed by the away exchange(s) for the
relevant option class and type of market participant (e.g.,
Customer, Firm, Broker/Dealer, Professional Customer or Market
Maker).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange assesses fees in connection with orders routed away to
various exchanges. Currently, under the Routing Fees table of the Fee
Schedule, fee codes RD, RE, RF, RG, RH and RI are appended to certain
Customer orders in ETF and Equity options, as follows:
Fee code RD is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity
options \5\ for greater than or equal to 100 contracts routed to NYSE
American (``AMEX''), BOX Options Exchange (``BOX''), Nasdaq BX Options
(``BX''), Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX''), ISE Mercury, LLC
(``MERC''), MIAX Options Exchange (``MIAX'') or Nasdaq PHLX LLC
(``PHLX''), and assesses a charge of $0.33 per contract;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The Exchange also updates fee codes RD and RF to make clear
that ``equity'' options are included in the description. The System
currently applies the applicable routing fee codes (RD, RE, RF, RG
and RH) to both ETF and equity options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
fee code RE is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity
options for less than 100 contracts routed to AMEX, BOX, BX, EDGX,
MERC, MIAX or PHLX, and assesses a charge of $0.15 per contract;
fee code RF is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity,
Penny options for greater than or equal to 100 contracts routed to NYSE
Arca, Inc (``ARCA''), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX''), Cboe C2
Exchange, Inc. (``C2''), Nasdaq ISE (``ISE''), ISE Gemini, LLC
(``GMNI''), MIAX Emerald Exchange (``EMLD''), MIAX Pearl Exchange
(``PERL'') or Nasdaq Options Market LLC (``NOMX), and assesses a charge
of $0.83 per contract;
fee code RG is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity,
Non-Penny options for greater than or equal to 100 contracts routed to
ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX, and assesses a charge of
$1.18 per contract;
fee code RH is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity,
Penny options for less than 100 contracts routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE,
GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX, and assesses a charge of $0.65 per contract;
and
fee code RI is appended to Customer order in ETF/Equity,
Non-Penny options for less than 100 contracts routed to ARCA, BZX, C2,
ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX, and assesses a charge of $1.00 per
contract.
The Exchange proposes to remove fee codes RE, RG and RH and amend
fee codes RD, RF and RI by removing the 100-contract size limit from
each and updating the fees assessed to $0.25 per contract, $0.75 per
contract and $1.25 per contract, respectively. The Exchange believes
that eliminating fee codes RE, RG and RH and the 100-contract
contingency currently applicable to orders that yield fee codes RD, RF
and RI will simplify and streamline the System's billing process for
routed Customer orders in ETF and equity options. By removing the size
contingency, orders to which RE, RG and RH are currently applicable may
then be absorbed into orders to which RD, RF and RI are currently
applicable and the routing fees for Customer orders in ETF and equity
options may be billed as one of three fee codes, instead of six. For
example, fee code RG would, prior to this proposal, be appended to
Customer orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options for 100 contracts or
more routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX. However,
without the size contingency, RI will now be appended to all Customer
orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options routed to the same away
exchanges. Regarding the proposed rate changes for the remaining
Customer ETF/Equity routing fee codes (RD, RF and RI), the Exchange
notes that its current approach to routing fees is to set forth in a
simple manner certain sub-categories of fees that approximate the cost
of routing to other options exchanges based on the cost of transaction
fees assessed by each venue as well as a flat $0.15 assessment that
covers costs to the Exchange for routing (i.e., clearing fees,
connectivity and other infrastructure costs, membership fees, etc.)
(collectively, ``Routing Costs''). The Exchange then monitors
[[Page 83117]]
the fees charged as compared to the costs of its routing services and
adjusts its routing fees and/or sub-categories to ensure that the
Exchange's fees do indeed result in a rough approximation of overall
Routing Costs, and are not significantly higher or lower in any area.
As a result, the Exchange believes the proposed amended rates for RD,
RF and RI are adjusted to reflect an appropriate, current approximation
of the routing costs to the applicable sub-category group of away
exchanges for ETF/Equity options of any order size, and these routing
fee codes will absorb the orders to which RE, RG and RH are currently
appended. The Exchange notes that routing through the Exchange is
optional and that TPHs will continue to be able to choose where to
route their Customer orders in ETF and equity options.
The Exchange also proposes to update routing fee codes RD and RF in
the Routing Fees table of the Fees Schedule connection with routed
Customer orders in SPY options to Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``PHLX''). As
described above, routing fee code RD is appended to Customer orders in
ETF/Equity options routed to AMEX, BOX, BX, EDGX, MERC, MIAX or PHLX
and assesses a charge of $0.25 per contract (as proposed), and routing
fee code RF is appended to Customer orders in ETF options in Penny
classes routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL, NOMX or PHLX
and assesses a charge of $0.75 per contract (as proposed). Currently,
PHLX assesses a charge of $0.42 per contract for Customer orders in SPY
options that remove liquidity.\6\ As described above, the Exchange
currently assesses a routing fee of $0.33 per contract for Customer
orders routed to PHLX which yield fee code RP. This structure does not
currently take into account, and approximately cover, the $0.42 per
contract fee assessed by PHLX for Customer orders in SPY options.
Therefore, in order to assess fees more in line with the Exchange's
current approach to routing fees, that is, in a manner that
approximates the cost of routing Customer orders in SPY options to
PHLX, along with other away options exchanges, based on the general
cost of transaction fees assessed by the sub-category of away options
exchanges for such orders (as well as the Exchange's routing costs),
the Exchange proposes to exclude Customer orders is SPY options routed
to PHLX from orders that yield fee code RD and are assessed a charge of
$0.25 per contract (as proposed) and, instead, add Customer orders
routed to PHLX in SPY options only to orders that yield fee code RF \7\
and are assessed a charge of $0.75 per contract (as proposed).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Nasdaq Phlx Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 3
``Rebates and Fees for Adding and Removing Liquidity in SPY'', Part
A.
\7\ The Exchange notes that SPY options are part of the Penny
Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\8\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \9\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\10\ which requires that Exchange rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its Trading Permit Holders and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to remove fee
codes RE, RG and RH and remove the size contingency for fee codes RD,
RF and RI is reasonable in that it is reasonably designed to simplify
and streamline the System's billing process for routed Customer orders
in ETF and equity options. By removing the size contingency, orders to
which fee codes RE, RG and RH are currently applicable may then be
absorbed into the orders to which fee codes RD, RF and RI are
applicable and the routing fees for Customer orders in ETF and equity
options may be billed as one of three fee codes, instead of six. The
Exchange also believes that it is reasonable to amend the rates that
correspond to fee codes RD, RF and RI because the proposed rates are
aligned with the Exchange's current approach to approximating the cost
of routing to other options exchanges based on the cost of transaction
fees assessed by each venue as well as the Exchange's Routing Cost. The
Exchange believes the proposed amended rates for orders that yield fee
codes RD, RF and RI are adjusted to reasonably reflect an appropriate,
current approximation of the routing costs for ETF/Equity options of
any order size to the sub-category group of away exchanges, and these
routing fee codes will absorb the orders to which fee codes RE, RG and
RH are currently appended. For example, routed Customer orders in ETF/
Equity Non-Penny options that yield fee code RG (greater than or equal
to 100 contracts) are currently assessed a routing fee of $1.18 per
contract, while routed Customer orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options
that yield fee code RH (less than 100 contracts) are currently assessed
a routing fee of $1.00. However, upon the removal of fee code RG, those
routed Customer orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options will yield fee
code RH, which will assess a proposed fee of $1.25, which the Exchange
believes is appropriately adjusted to reflect the current approximate
cost of routing Customer orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options of all
sizes to the same sub-category group of away exchanges. The Exchange
notes that routing through the Exchange is optional and that TPHs will
continue to be able to choose where to route their Customer orders in
ETF and equity options in the same sub-category group of away exchanges
as they currently may choose to route. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because TPHs' routed Customer orders in ETF/Equity options will
continue to be automatically and uniformly assessed the applicable
routing charges.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to amend fee codes
RD and RF to account for PHLX's current assessment of fees for Customer
orders in SPY options is reasonable because it is reasonably designed
to assess routing fees in line with the Exchange's current approach to
routing fees. That is, the proposed rule change is intended to include
Customer orders in SPY options routed to PHLX in the most appropriate
sub-category of fees that approximates the cost of routing to a group
of away options exchanges (including PHLX) based on the cost of
transaction fees assessed by each venue as well as Routing Costs to the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all TPHs' Customer
orders in SPY routed to PHLX will automatically yield fee code RQ
[[Page 83118]]
and uniformly be assessed the corresponding fee.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intramarket or intermarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change to remove
certain routing fee codes and to update other routing fee codes
accordingly to apply instead, will impose any burden on intramarket
competition because all TPHs' routed Customer orders in ETF/Equity
options will continue to be able to route to the same sub-category
group of away exchanges and will automatically and uniformly be
assessed the applicable routing fees. Likewise, all TPH's Customer
orders in SPY options routed to PHLX will automatically yield fee code
RF and uniformly be assessed the corresponding fee.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes in
connection with routing fees will impose any burden on intermarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because, as previously discussed, the Exchange
operates in a highly competitive market. The Exchange notes that other
options exchanges approximate routing costs in a similar manner as the
Exchange's current approach.\11\ Also, the Exchange notes that, in
addition to Cboe Options, TPHs have numerous alternative venues that
they may participate on and director their order flow, including 15
other options exchanges, as well as off-exchange venues, where
competitive products are available for trading. Based on publicly
available information, no single options exchange has more than 16% of
the market share of executed volume of options trades.\12\ Therefore,
no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of
option order flow. Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly expressed
its preference for competition over regulatory intervention in
determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets.
Specifically, 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
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \13\ The fact that this market is competitive has also
long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities and
Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one
disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC
explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of
securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-routing
agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders for
execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers'. . . .'' \14\ Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its
proposed changes to the incentive programs impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See supra note 4.
\12\ See supra note 3.
\13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
\14\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \16\
thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge imposed
by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule 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 [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2020-114 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-2020-114. 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; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2020-114 and should be
submitted on or before January 11, 2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28009 Filed 12-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P