Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Suspension of and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove Proposed Rule Changes To Amend the MIAX Pearl Options Fee Schedule To Remove Certain Credits and Increase Trading Permit Fees, 49399-49403 [2021-18948]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 168 / Thursday, September 2, 2021 / Notices
Commission finds that the proposed
changes to Form CMA conform to the
recently amended MAP rules.37 The
Commission therefore finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the goals set forth by the Commission
when it approved amendments to the
MAP rules as described in File No. SR–
FINRA–2020–011, which become
effective on September 1, 2021.38 The
Commission finds that waiving the 30day operative delay would facilitate
firm compliance with the amended
MAP rules on the date they become
effective.39 Therefore, the Commission
believes it is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public
interest to waive the 30-day operative
delay requirement. Therefore the
Commission designates the proposed
rule change as operative on September
1, 2021.
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 shall institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
should be approved or disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–FINRA–2021–020 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–FINRA–2021–020. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if email is used. To help the
37 See
supra note 5.
38 Id.
39 Similarly, the Commission finds that the nonsubstantive and technical changes to Form CMA are
consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:33 Sep 01, 2021
Jkt 253001
49399
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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing
also will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal office of
FINRA. 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–FINRA–2021–020 and
should be submitted on or before
August 23, 2021.
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’
or ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
a proposed rule change (File Number
SR–PEARL–2021–32) to amend the
MIAX Pearl Options Fee Schedule (‘‘Fee
Schedule’’) to remove certain credits
and increase monthly Trading Permit
fees for Exchange Members.3 The
proposed rule change was immediately
effective upon filing with the
Commission pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.4 The proposed
rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on July 15,
2021.5 The Commission has received no
comment letters on the proposed rule
change. Under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the
Act,6 the Commission is hereby: (i)
Temporarily suspending File Number
SR–PEARL–2021–32; and (ii) instituting
proceedings to determine whether to
approve or disapprove File Number SR–
PEARL–2021–32.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.40
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
Remove ‘‘Monthly Volume Credit’’
[FR Doc. 2021–18945 Filed 9–1–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–92797; File No. SR–
PEARL–2021–32]
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
The Exchange proposes to amend its
Fee Schedule to: (1) Delete the
definition of and remove the credits
applicable to the Monthly Volume
Credit for Members; (2) and; (3) amend
Section (3)(b) of the Fee Schedule to
increase the amount of monthly Trading
Permit Fees.
The Exchange proposes to amend the
Definitions section of its Fee Schedule
to delete the definition of ‘‘Monthly
Volume Credit’’ and remove the credits
applicable to the Monthly Volume
Credit for Members.7 The Exchange
states that the Monthly Volume Credit
was established in 2018 to encourage
Members to send increased Priority
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 The term ‘‘Trading Permit’’ means a permit
issued by the Exchange that confers the ability to
transact on the Exchange. See Notice, infra note 5,
at 37379. The term ‘‘Member’’ means an individual
or organization that is registered with the Exchange
pursuant to Chapter II of Exchange Rules for
purposes of trading on the Exchange as an
‘‘Electronic Exchange Member’’ or ‘‘Market Maker.’’
Members are deemed ‘‘members’’ under the
Exchange Act. See id.
4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). A proposed rule change
may take effect upon filing with the Commission if
it is designated by the exchange as ‘‘establishing or
changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the
self-regulatory organization on any person, whether
or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory
organization.’’ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92366
(July 9, 2021), 86 FR 37379 (‘‘Notice’’).
6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
7 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37379–80.
2 17
Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX
PEARL, LLC; Suspension of and Order
Instituting Proceedings To Determine
Whether To Approve or Disapprove
Proposed Rule Changes To Amend the
MIAX Pearl Options Fee Schedule To
Remove Certain Credits and Increase
Trading Permit Fees
August 27, 2021.
I. Introduction
On July 1, 2021, MIAX PEARL, LLC
(‘‘MIAX Pearl’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant
40 17
PO 00000
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
Frm 00113
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\02SEN1.SGM
02SEN1
49400
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 168 / Thursday, September 2, 2021 / Notices
Customer 8 order flow to the Exchange.
The Monthly Volume Credit is provided
to Members whose executed Priority
Customer volume along with that of its
Affiliates,9 not including Excluded
Contracts,10 is at least 0.30% of
Exchange-listed Total Consolidated
Volume (‘‘TCV’’) 11 and is $250 for
Members that connect via the FIX
Interface and $1,000 for Members that
connect via the MEO Interface (or both
interfaces).12 The Monthly Volume
Credit is a single once-per-month credit
towards the aggregate monthly total of
non-transaction fees assessable to a
Member.
Remove Trading Permit Fee Credit
The Exchange also proposes to amend
Section (3)(b) of the Fee Schedule to
remove a Trading Permit fee credit of
$100 that is provided to Members who
connect via both the MEO and FIX
Interfaces and is a monthly credit
towards the Trading Permit fees
applicable to the MEO Interface use.13
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Increase Monthly Trading Permit Fees
The Exchange also proposes to amend
Section (3)(b) of the Fee Schedule to
increase the amount of the monthly
Trading Permit fees that are charged to
Exchange Members that are Electronic
Exchange Members or Market Makers.14
These fees are assessed in a tier-based
fee structure based on the monthly total
volume executed by a Member and its
Affiliates on the Exchange across all
origin types, not including Excluded
Contracts, as compared to all Exchangelisted options and are also assessed
8 ‘‘Priority Customer’’ means a person or entity
that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and
(ii) does not place more than 390 orders in listed
options per day on average during a calendar month
for its own beneficial accounts(s). The number of
orders shall be counted in accordance with
Interpretation and Policy .01 of Exchange Rule 100.
See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380 n.6.
9 ‘‘Affiliate’’ means (i) an affiliate of a Member of
at least 75% common ownership between the firms
as reflected on each firm’s Form BD, Schedule A,
or (ii) the Appointed Market Maker of an Appointed
EEM (or, conversely, the Appointed EEM of an
Appointed Market Maker). See Notice, supra note
5, at 37380 n.9.
10 ‘‘Excluded Contracts’’ means any contracts
routed to an away market for execution. See Notice,
supra note 5, at 37380 n.10.
11 ‘‘TCV’’ means total consolidated volume
calculated as the total national volume in those
classes listed on MIAX Pearl for the month for
which the fees apply, excluding consolidated
volume executed during the period of time in
which the Exchange experiences an Exchange
System Disruption (solely in the option classes of
the affected Matching Engine). See Notice, supra
note 5, at 37380 n.11.
12 The ‘‘FIX Interface’’ and ‘‘MEO Interface’’ are
different interfaces for certain order types as set
forth in Exchange Rule 516. See Notice, supra note
5, at 37380 n.7–8.
13 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380.
14 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380–81.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:33 Sep 01, 2021
Jkt 253001
based upon the type of interface used by
the Member to connect to the Exchange,
specifically the FIX Interface and/or the
MEO Interface.15
The Exchange proposes to increase
fees for Trading Permits as follows:
For Members that connect via the FIX
Interface, if the Member’s relevant
monthly volume falls within the
parameters of:
• Tier 1 (up to 0.30% TCV): The
monthly fee would increase from $250
to $500;
• Tier 2 (above 0.30%, up to 0.60%
TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $350 to $1,000; and
• Tier 3 (above 0.60% TCV): The
monthly fee would increase from $450
to $1,500.
For Members that connect via the
MEO interface, if the Member’s relevant
monthly volume falls within the
parameters of:
• Tier 1 (up to 0.30% TCV): The
monthly fee would increase from $300
to $2,500;
• Tier 2 (above 0.30%, up to 0.60%
TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $400 to $4,000; and
• Tier 3 (above 0.60% TCV): The
monthly fee would increase from $500
to $6,000.
III. Suspension of the Proposed Rule
Change
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the
Act,16 at any time within 60 days of the
date of filing of an immediately effective
proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Act,17 the
Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend the change in the
rules of a self-regulatory organization
(‘‘SRO’’) 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. As discussed below, the
Commission believes a temporary
suspension of the proposed rule change
is necessary and appropriate to allow for
additional analysis of the proposed rule
change’s consistency with the Act and
the rules thereunder.
In support of the proposed fee
changes, the Exchange principally
argues that these fees are constrained by
competitive forces, and that this is
supported by their revenue and cost
analysis. In particular, the Exchange
states that it operates in a ‘‘highly
competitive market’’ in which market
participants can readily favor competing
venues if they deem fee levels at a
15 See
Notice, supra note 5, at 37380.
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
16 15
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
particular venue to be excessive.18 In
further support of its argument that
competitive forces constrain its
proposed fee changes, Exchange further
states that if it were to attempt to
establish unreasonable pricing, then no
market participant would join or
connect, and existing market
participants would disconnect.19 In
addition, the Exchange states that it is
not aware of any reason why market
participants could not simply drop their
access to an exchange (or not initially
access an exchange) if an exchange were
to establish prices for its nontransaction fees that, in the
determination of such market
participant, did not make business or
economic sense for such market
participant to access such exchange, and
claims that no options market
participant is required by rule,
regulation, or competitive forces to be a
Member of the Exchange, which the
Exchange believes is illustrated by the
fact that it is unaware of any one
options exchange whose membership
includes every registered brokerdealer.20
The Exchange also states that these
fees are designed to recover a portion of
the costs associated with directly
accessing the Exchange. The Exchange
believes that Trading Permits are a
means to directly access the Exchange
and thus offers meaningful value (and
without a Trading Permit a Member
cannot directly trade on the Exchange).
The Exchange provides an analysis of its
revenues, costs, and profitability
associated with these fees, which it
references as ‘‘Proposed Access Fees.’’ 21
The Exchange states that this analysis
reflects an extensive cost review in
which the Exchange analyzed every
expense item in the Exchange’s general
expense ledger to determine whether
each such expense relates to the
Proposed Access Fees, and, if such
expense did so relate, what portion (or
percentage) of such expense actually
supports the access services.22 The
Exchange states that this analysis shows
that the Proposed Access Fees will not
result in excessive pricing or supracompetitive profit when compared to
the Exchange’s annual expense
associated with providing the services
18 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37387; see also id.
at 37382.
19 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37382.
20 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37387.
21 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37381–86.
22 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37382. In addition,
the Exchange notes that the expenses discussed
within their filing only cover the MIAX Pearl
options market; expenses associated with the MIAX
Pearl equities market are accounted for separately
and are not included within the scope of this filing.
See id. at 37384.
E:\FR\FM\02SEN1.SGM
02SEN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 168 / Thursday, September 2, 2021 / Notices
associated with the Proposed Access
Fees versus the annual revenue the
Exchange will collect for providing
those services.23
The Exchange states that for 2021, the
total annual expense for providing the
access services associated with the
Proposed Access Fees for the Exchange
is projected to be approximately
$844,741.24 The $844,741 in projected
total annual expense is comprised of the
following, all of which the Exchange
states are directly related to the access
services associated with the Proposed
Access Fees: (1) Third-party expense,
relating to fees paid by the Exchange to
third-parties for certain products and
services; and (2) internal expense,
relating to the internal costs of the
Exchange to provide the services
associated with the Proposed Access
Fees. The Exchange states that the
$844,741 in projected total annual
expense is directly related to the access
services associated with the Proposed
Access Fees, and not any other product
or service offered by the Exchange.
The Exchange states that the total
third-party expense, relating to fees paid
by the Exchange to third-parties for
certain products and services for the
Exchange to be able to provide the
access services associated with the
Proposed Access Fees is projected to be
$188,815 for 2021.25 The Exchange
represents that it determined whether
third-party expenses related to the
access services associated with the
Proposed Access Fees, and, if such
expense did so relate, determined what
portion (or percentage) of such expense
represents the cost to the Exchange to
provide access services associated with
the Proposed Access Fees. This includes
allocating a portion of fees paid to: (1)
Equinix, for data center services
(approximately 8% of the Exchange’s
total applicable Equinix expense); (2)
Zayo Group Holdings, Inc. for network
services (approximately 4%); (3) Secure
Financial Transaction Infrastructure and
various other services providers
(approximately 3%); and (4) various
other hardware and software providers
(approximately 5%).
In addition, the Exchange states that
the total internal expense, relating to the
internal costs of the Exchange to
provide the access services associated
with the Proposed Access Fees, is
projected to be $655,925 for 2021.26 The
Exchange represents that: (1) The
Exchange’s employee compensation and
benefits expense relating to providing
23 See
Notice, supra note 5, at 37382, 37386.
Notice, supra note 5, at 37383–84.
25 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37384–85.
26 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37385–86.
24 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:33 Sep 01, 2021
Jkt 253001
the access services associated with the
Proposed Access Fees is projected to be
$549,824, which is a portion of the
Exchange’s total projected expense of
$9,163,894 for employee compensation
and benefits (approximately 6%); (2) the
Exchange’s depreciation and
amortization expense relating to
providing the access services associated
with the Proposed Access Fees is
projected to be $66,316, which is a
portion of the Exchange’s total projected
expense of $1,326,325 for depreciation
and amortization (approximately 5%);
and (3) the Exchange’s occupancy
expense relating to providing the access
services associated with the Proposed
Access Fees is projected to be $39,775,
which is a portion of the Exchange’s
total projected expense of $497,180 for
occupancy (approximately 8%).
The Exchange states that this cost and
revenue analysis shows that the
proposed rule change will not result in
excessive pricing or supra-competitive
profit.27 The Exchange projects that, on
a fully-annualized basis, the Proposed
Access Fees will have an expense of
$844,741 per year and a projected
revenue of $1,170,000 per year,
resulting in a projected profit margin of
28% ($1,170,000 in projected revenue
minus $844,741 in projected expense =
$325,259 profit per year). The Exchange
states that this estimated profit margin
is well below the operating profit
margins of other competing exchanges
based on financial statements provided
by them in Form 1 filings.28 The
Exchange also claims that the Trading
Permit fees are reasonable and equitable
because ‘‘they are in line with, or
cheaper than, the trading permit fees or
similar membership fees charged by
other options exchanges.’’ 29
The Exchange further states that its
proposed fees are reasonable, equitably
allocated and not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange,
and its affiliates, Miami International
Securities Exchange, LLC and MIAX
Emerald, LLC, are still recouping the
initial expenditures from building out
their systems while the ‘‘legacy’’
exchanges have already paid for and
built their systems.30 The Exchange also
believes that removal of the Monthly
27 See
Notice, supra note 5, at 37386.
Notice, supra note 5, at 37386. The
Exchange states that Nasdaq ISE, LLC’s operating
profit margin for 2019 was 83% and Nasdaq PHLX
LLC’s operating profit margin for 2019 was 67%.
29 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37387. The
Exchange cites fees from NYSE Arca, NYSE
American, and CBOE BZX Options Exchange in
support of this statement. See id. at 37381 n.18. For
a more detailed description of the Exchange’s
justifications for the proposed rule change, see
Notice, supra note 5, at 37381–88.
30 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37386.
28 See
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49401
Volume Credit and Trading Permit fee
credit is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because all
market participants will no longer be
offered the ability to receive the credit
and access to the Exchange is offered on
terms that are not unfairly
discriminatory.31 In addition, the
Exchange states that these credits were
offered in order to attract order flow and
membership after the Exchange first
launched operations, and it is now
appropriate to remove these credits in
light of the current operating conditions
of the Exchange.32
The Exchange states that the proposed
fees are equitably allocated, not unfairly
discriminatory, and do not impose an
unnecessary or inappropriate burden on
competition because the Proposed
Access Fees do not favor certain
categories of market participants,33 the
difference in Trading Permit fees for FIX
versus MEO Interface users reflects the
fact FIX Interface utilizes less capacity
and resources of the Exchange while the
MEO Interface offers lower latency and
higher throughput, which utilizes
greater capacity and resources of the
Exchange; 34 and options market
participants are not forced to connect to
(and purchase Trading Permits) all
options exchanges.35
When exchanges file their proposed
rule changes with the Commission,
including fee filings like the Exchange’s
present proposal, they are required to
provide a statement supporting the
proposal’s basis under the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to the exchange.36 The
instructions to Form 19b–4, on which
exchanges file their proposed rule
changes, specify that such statement
‘‘should be sufficiently detailed and
specific to support a finding that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
[those] requirements.’’ 37
Section 6 of the Act, including
Sections 6(b)(4), (5), and (8), require the
rules of an exchange to (1) provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable
fees among members, issuers, and other
persons using the exchange’s
facilities; 38 (2) perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national
31 See
Notice, supra note 5, at 37382–83.
Notice, supra note 5, at 37382–83.
33 See id. at 37387.
34 See Notice, supra note 5, at 37381.
35 For a more detailed description of the
Exchange’s justifications for the proposed rule
change, see Notice, supra note 5, at 37381–88.
36 See 17 CFR 240.19b–4 (Item 3 entitled ‘‘SelfRegulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose
of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change’’).
37 Id.
38 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
32 See
E:\FR\FM\02SEN1.SGM
02SEN1
49402
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 168 / Thursday, September 2, 2021 / Notices
market system, protect investors and the
public interest, and not be designed to
permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers; 39 and (3) not impose any
burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.40
In temporarily suspending the
Exchange’s fee change, the Commission
intends to further consider whether the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the statutory requirements applicable to
a national securities exchange under the
Act. In particular, the Commission will
consider whether the proposed rule
change satisfies the standards under the
Act and the rules thereunder requiring,
among other things, that an exchange’s
rules provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable fees among
members, issuers, and other persons
using its facilities; not permit unfair
discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers; and do not
impose any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.41
Therefore, the Commission finds that
it is appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, and
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act, to temporarily suspend the
proposed rule change.42
IV. Proceedings To Determine Whether
To Approve or Disapprove the
Proposed Rule Change
In addition to temporarily suspending
the proposal, the Commission also
hereby institutes proceedings pursuant
to Sections 19(b)(3)(C) 43 and 19(b)(2)(B)
of the Act 44 to determine whether the
proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved. Institution of
proceedings does not indicate that the
Commission has reached any
conclusions with respect to any of the
issues involved. Rather, the Commission
seeks and encourages interested persons
to provide additional comment on the
proposed rule change to inform the
Commission’s analysis of whether to
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
41 See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8),
respectively.
42 For purposes of temporarily suspending the
proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
43 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). Once the Commission
temporarily suspends a proposed rule change,
Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that the
Commission institute proceedings under Section
19(b)(2)(B) to determine whether a proposed rule
change should be approved or disapproved.
44 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the
Act,45 the Commission is providing
notice of the grounds for possible
disapproval under consideration:
• Whether the Exchange has
demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the
Act, which requires that the rules of a
national securities exchange ‘‘provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and issuers and other persons
using its facilities;’’ 46
• Whether the Exchange has
demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act, which requires, among other
things, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be ‘‘designed to
perfect the operation of a free and open
market and a national market system’’
and ‘‘protect investors and the public
interest,’’ and not be ‘‘designed to
permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers;’’ 47 and
• Whether the Exchange has
demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the
Act, which requires that the rules of a
national securities exchange ‘‘not
impose any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of [the Act].’’ 48
As discussed in Section III above, the
Exchange makes various arguments in
support of the proposal. The
Commission believes that there are
questions as to whether the Exchange
has provided sufficient information to
demonstrate that the proposal to remove
certain credits and increase monthly
Trading Permit fees is consistent with
the Act and the rules thereunder.
Under the Commission’s Rules of
Practice, the ‘‘burden to demonstrate
that a proposed rule change is
consistent with the [Act] and the rules
and regulations issued thereunder . . .
is on the [SRO] that proposed the rule
change.’’ 49 The description of a
proposed rule change, its purpose and
operation, its effect, and a legal analysis
39 15
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
40 15
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:33 Sep 01, 2021
Jkt 253001
45 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the
Act also provides that proceedings to determine
whether to disapprove a proposed rule change must
be concluded within 180 days of the date of
publication of notice of the filing of the proposed
rule change. See id. The time for conclusion of the
proceedings may be extended for up to 60 days if
the Commission finds good cause for such
extension and publishes its reasons for so finding,
or if the exchange consents to the longer period. See
id.
46 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
47 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
48 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
49 17 CFR 201.700(b)(3).
PO 00000
Frm 00116
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
of its consistency with applicable
requirements must all be sufficiently
detailed and specific to support an
affirmative Commission finding,50 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 Act and the applicable rules
and regulations.51
The Commission is instituting
proceedings to allow for additional
consideration and comment on the
issues raised herein, including as to
whether the proposal is consistent with
the Act, specifically, with its
requirements that the rules of a national
securities exchange provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its
members, issuers, and other persons
using its facilities; are designed to
perfect the operation of a free and open
market and a national market system,
and to protect investors and the public
interest; are not designed to permit
unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers;
and do not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act; 52 as well as any
other provision of the Act, or the rules
and regulations thereunder.
V. Commission’s Solicitation of
Comments
The Commission requests written
views, data, and arguments with respect
to the concerns identified above as well
as any other relevant concerns. Such
comments should be submitted by
September 23, 2021. Rebuttal comments
should be submitted by October 7, 2021.
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.53
The Commission asks that
commenters address the sufficiency and
merit of the Exchange’s statements in
support of the proposal, in addition to
50 See
id.
id.
52 See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8).
53 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
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 an
SRO. See Securities Acts Amendments of 1975,
Report of the Senate Committee on Banking,
Housing and Urban Affairs to Accompany S. 249,
S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
51 See
E:\FR\FM\02SEN1.SGM
02SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 168 / Thursday, September 2, 2021 / Notices
any other comments they may wish to
submit about the proposed rule change.
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the proposed rule
change, including whether the proposal
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–
PEARL–2021–32 on the subject line.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
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–PEARL–2021–32. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
internet website (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:33 Sep 01, 2021
Jkt 253001
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–PEARL–2021–32 and
should be submitted on or before
September 23, 2021. Rebuttal comments
should be submitted by October 7, 2021.
VI. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act,54 that File
Number SR–PEARL–2021–32 be and
hereby is, temporarily suspended. In
addition, the Commission is instituting
proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.55
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–18948 Filed 9–1–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
[Docket No: SSA–2021–0034]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Request and
Comment Request
The Social Security Administration
(SSA) publishes a list of information
collection packages requiring clearance
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in compliance with
Public Law 104–13, the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, effective October
1, 1995. This notice includes an
extension and revisions of OMBapproved information collections.
SSA is soliciting comments on the
accuracy of the agency’s burden
estimate; the need for the information;
its practical utility; ways to enhance its
quality, utility, and clarity; and ways to
minimize burden on respondents,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Mail, email, or
fax your comments and
recommendations on the information
collection(s) to the OMB Desk Officer
and SSA Reports Clearance Officer at
the following addresses or fax numbers.
54 15
55 17
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
CFR 200.30–3(a)(57) and (58).
Frm 00117
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49403
(OMB) Office of Management and
Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for SSA
Comments: https://www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain. Submit your
comments online referencing Docket ID
Number [SSA–2021–0034].
(SSA) Social Security Administration,
OLCA, Attn: Reports Clearance
Director, 3100 West High Rise, 6401
Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235,
Fax: 410–966–2830, Email address:
OR.Reports.Clearance@ssa.gov
Or you may submit your comments
online through https://www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain, referencing Docket
ID Number [SSA–2021–0034].
I. The information collection below is
pending at SSA. SSA will submit it to
OMB within 60 days from the date of
this notice. To be sure we consider your
comments, we must receive them no
later than November 1, 2021.
Individuals can obtain copies of the
collection instrument by writing to the
above email address.
Registration for Appointed
Representative Services and Direct
Payment—0960–0732. SSA uses Form
SSA–1699 to register appointed
representatives of claimants before SSA
who:
• Want to register for direct payment
of fees;
• Registered for direct payment of
fees prior to 10/31/09, but need to
update their information;
• Registered as appointed
representatives on or after 10/31/09, but
need to update their information; or
• Received a notice from SSA
instructing them to complete this form.
By registering these individuals, SSA:
(1) Authenticates and authorizes them
to do business with us; (2) allows them
to access our records for the claimants
they represent; (3) facilitates direct
payment of authorized fees to appointed
representatives; and, (4) collects the
information we need to meet Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) requirements to
issue specific IRS forms if we pay an
appointed representative in excess of a
specific amount ($600). The
respondents are appointed
representatives who want to use Form
SSA–1699 for any of the purposes cited
in this Notice.
Type of Request: Revision of an OMBapproved information collection.
E:\FR\FM\02SEN1.SGM
02SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 168 (Thursday, September 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49399-49403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18948]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-92797; File No. SR-PEARL-2021-32]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Suspension of and
Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or
Disapprove Proposed Rule Changes To Amend the MIAX Pearl Options Fee
Schedule To Remove Certain Credits and Increase Trading Permit Fees
August 27, 2021.
I. Introduction
On July 1, 2021, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX Pearl'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'' or ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change (File Number SR-PEARL-2021-32) to amend the MIAX
Pearl Options Fee Schedule (``Fee Schedule'') to remove certain credits
and increase monthly Trading Permit fees for Exchange Members.\3\ The
proposed rule change was immediately effective upon filing with the
Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.\4\ The proposed
rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on July
15, 2021.\5\ The Commission has received no comment letters on the
proposed rule change. Under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act,\6\ the
Commission is hereby: (i) Temporarily suspending File Number SR-PEARL-
2021-32; and (ii) instituting proceedings to determine whether to
approve or disapprove File Number SR-PEARL-2021-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ The term ``Trading Permit'' means a permit issued by the
Exchange that confers the ability to transact on the Exchange. See
Notice, infra note 5, at 37379. The term ``Member'' means an
individual or organization that is registered with the Exchange
pursuant to Chapter II of Exchange Rules for purposes of trading on
the Exchange as an ``Electronic Exchange Member'' or ``Market
Maker.'' Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
id.
\4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). A proposed rule change may take
effect upon filing with the Commission if it is designated by the
exchange as ``establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the self-regulatory organization on any person, whether
or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory organization.''
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
\5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92366 (July 9,
2021), 86 FR 37379 (``Notice'').
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to: (1) Delete the
definition of and remove the credits applicable to the Monthly Volume
Credit for Members; (2) and; (3) amend Section (3)(b) of the Fee
Schedule to increase the amount of monthly Trading Permit Fees.
Remove ``Monthly Volume Credit''
The Exchange proposes to amend the Definitions section of its Fee
Schedule to delete the definition of ``Monthly Volume Credit'' and
remove the credits applicable to the Monthly Volume Credit for
Members.\7\ The Exchange states that the Monthly Volume Credit was
established in 2018 to encourage Members to send increased Priority
[[Page 49400]]
Customer \8\ order flow to the Exchange. The Monthly Volume Credit is
provided to Members whose executed Priority Customer volume along with
that of its Affiliates,\9\ not including Excluded Contracts,\10\ is at
least 0.30% of Exchange-listed Total Consolidated Volume (``TCV'') \11\
and is $250 for Members that connect via the FIX Interface and $1,000
for Members that connect via the MEO Interface (or both
interfaces).\12\ The Monthly Volume Credit is a single once-per-month
credit towards the aggregate monthly total of non-transaction fees
assessable to a Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37379-80.
\8\ ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity that (i) is
not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not place more
than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial accounts(s). The number of
orders shall be counted in accordance with Interpretation and Policy
.01 of Exchange Rule 100. See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380 n.6.
\9\ ``Affiliate'' means (i) an affiliate of a Member of at least
75% common ownership between the firms as reflected on each firm's
Form BD, Schedule A, or (ii) the Appointed Market Maker of an
Appointed EEM (or, conversely, the Appointed EEM of an Appointed
Market Maker). See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380 n.9.
\10\ ``Excluded Contracts'' means any contracts routed to an
away market for execution. See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380 n.10.
\11\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
total national volume in those classes listed on MIAX Pearl for the
month for which the fees apply, excluding consolidated volume
executed during the period of time in which the Exchange experiences
an Exchange System Disruption (solely in the option classes of the
affected Matching Engine). See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380 n.11.
\12\ The ``FIX Interface'' and ``MEO Interface'' are different
interfaces for certain order types as set forth in Exchange Rule
516. See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380 n.7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remove Trading Permit Fee Credit
The Exchange also proposes to amend Section (3)(b) of the Fee
Schedule to remove a Trading Permit fee credit of $100 that is provided
to Members who connect via both the MEO and FIX Interfaces and is a
monthly credit towards the Trading Permit fees applicable to the MEO
Interface use.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase Monthly Trading Permit Fees
The Exchange also proposes to amend Section (3)(b) of the Fee
Schedule to increase the amount of the monthly Trading Permit fees that
are charged to Exchange Members that are Electronic Exchange Members or
Market Makers.\14\ These fees are assessed in a tier-based fee
structure based on the monthly total volume executed by a Member and
its Affiliates on the Exchange across all origin types, not including
Excluded Contracts, as compared to all Exchange-listed options and are
also assessed based upon the type of interface used by the Member to
connect to the Exchange, specifically the FIX Interface and/or the MEO
Interface.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380-81.
\15\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37380.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to increase fees for Trading Permits as
follows:
For Members that connect via the FIX Interface, if the Member's
relevant monthly volume falls within the parameters of:
Tier 1 (up to 0.30% TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $250 to $500;
Tier 2 (above 0.30%, up to 0.60% TCV): The monthly fee
would increase from $350 to $1,000; and
Tier 3 (above 0.60% TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $450 to $1,500.
For Members that connect via the MEO interface, if the Member's
relevant monthly volume falls within the parameters of:
Tier 1 (up to 0.30% TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $300 to $2,500;
Tier 2 (above 0.30%, up to 0.60% TCV): The monthly fee
would increase from $400 to $4,000; and
Tier 3 (above 0.60% TCV): The monthly fee would increase
from $500 to $6,000.
III. Suspension of the Proposed Rule Change
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act,\16\ at any time within
60 days of the date of filing of an immediately effective proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Act,\17\ the Commission
summarily may temporarily suspend the change in the rules of a self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') 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. As discussed below, the Commission believes a temporary
suspension of the proposed rule change is necessary and appropriate to
allow for additional analysis of the proposed rule change's consistency
with the Act and the rules thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
\17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In support of the proposed fee changes, the Exchange principally
argues that these fees are constrained by competitive forces, and that
this is supported by their revenue and cost analysis. In particular,
the Exchange states that it operates in a ``highly competitive market''
in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they
deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive.\18\ In further
support of its argument that competitive forces constrain its proposed
fee changes, Exchange further states that if it were to attempt to
establish unreasonable pricing, then no market participant would join
or connect, and existing market participants would disconnect.\19\ In
addition, the Exchange states that it is not aware of any reason why
market participants could not simply drop their access to an exchange
(or not initially access an exchange) if an exchange were to establish
prices for its non-transaction fees that, in the determination of such
market participant, did not make business or economic sense for such
market participant to access such exchange, and claims that no options
market participant is required by rule, regulation, or competitive
forces to be a Member of the Exchange, which the Exchange believes is
illustrated by the fact that it is unaware of any one options exchange
whose membership includes every registered broker-dealer.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37387; see also id. at 37382.
\19\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37382.
\20\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37387.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also states that these fees are designed to recover a
portion of the costs associated with directly accessing the Exchange.
The Exchange believes that Trading Permits are a means to directly
access the Exchange and thus offers meaningful value (and without a
Trading Permit a Member cannot directly trade on the Exchange). The
Exchange provides an analysis of its revenues, costs, and profitability
associated with these fees, which it references as ``Proposed Access
Fees.'' \21\ The Exchange states that this analysis reflects an
extensive cost review in which the Exchange analyzed every expense item
in the Exchange's general expense ledger to determine whether each such
expense relates to the Proposed Access Fees, and, if such expense did
so relate, what portion (or percentage) of such expense actually
supports the access services.\22\ The Exchange states that this
analysis shows that the Proposed Access Fees will not result in
excessive pricing or supra-competitive profit when compared to the
Exchange's annual expense associated with providing the services
[[Page 49401]]
associated with the Proposed Access Fees versus the annual revenue the
Exchange will collect for providing those services.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37381-86.
\22\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37382. In addition, the
Exchange notes that the expenses discussed within their filing only
cover the MIAX Pearl options market; expenses associated with the
MIAX Pearl equities market are accounted for separately and are not
included within the scope of this filing. See id. at 37384.
\23\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37382, 37386.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that for 2021, the total annual expense for
providing the access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees
for the Exchange is projected to be approximately $844,741.\24\ The
$844,741 in projected total annual expense is comprised of the
following, all of which the Exchange states are directly related to the
access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees: (1) Third-
party expense, relating to fees paid by the Exchange to third-parties
for certain products and services; and (2) internal expense, relating
to the internal costs of the Exchange to provide the services
associated with the Proposed Access Fees. The Exchange states that the
$844,741 in projected total annual expense is directly related to the
access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees, and not any
other product or service offered by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37383-84.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that the total third-party expense, relating to
fees paid by the Exchange to third-parties for certain products and
services for the Exchange to be able to provide the access services
associated with the Proposed Access Fees is projected to be $188,815
for 2021.\25\ The Exchange represents that it determined whether third-
party expenses related to the access services associated with the
Proposed Access Fees, and, if such expense did so relate, determined
what portion (or percentage) of such expense represents the cost to the
Exchange to provide access services associated with the Proposed Access
Fees. This includes allocating a portion of fees paid to: (1) Equinix,
for data center services (approximately 8% of the Exchange's total
applicable Equinix expense); (2) Zayo Group Holdings, Inc. for network
services (approximately 4%); (3) Secure Financial Transaction
Infrastructure and various other services providers (approximately 3%);
and (4) various other hardware and software providers (approximately
5%).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37384-85.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Exchange states that the total internal expense,
relating to the internal costs of the Exchange to provide the access
services associated with the Proposed Access Fees, is projected to be
$655,925 for 2021.\26\ The Exchange represents that: (1) The Exchange's
employee compensation and benefits expense relating to providing the
access services associated with the Proposed Access Fees is projected
to be $549,824, which is a portion of the Exchange's total projected
expense of $9,163,894 for employee compensation and benefits
(approximately 6%); (2) the Exchange's depreciation and amortization
expense relating to providing the access services associated with the
Proposed Access Fees is projected to be $66,316, which is a portion of
the Exchange's total projected expense of $1,326,325 for depreciation
and amortization (approximately 5%); and (3) the Exchange's occupancy
expense relating to providing the access services associated with the
Proposed Access Fees is projected to be $39,775, which is a portion of
the Exchange's total projected expense of $497,180 for occupancy
(approximately 8%).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37385-86.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that this cost and revenue analysis shows that
the proposed rule change will not result in excessive pricing or supra-
competitive profit.\27\ The Exchange projects that, on a fully-
annualized basis, the Proposed Access Fees will have an expense of
$844,741 per year and a projected revenue of $1,170,000 per year,
resulting in a projected profit margin of 28% ($1,170,000 in projected
revenue minus $844,741 in projected expense = $325,259 profit per
year). The Exchange states that this estimated profit margin is well
below the operating profit margins of other competing exchanges based
on financial statements provided by them in Form 1 filings.\28\ The
Exchange also claims that the Trading Permit fees are reasonable and
equitable because ``they are in line with, or cheaper than, the trading
permit fees or similar membership fees charged by other options
exchanges.'' \29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37386.
\28\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37386. The Exchange states
that Nasdaq ISE, LLC's operating profit margin for 2019 was 83% and
Nasdaq PHLX LLC's operating profit margin for 2019 was 67%.
\29\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37387. The Exchange cites fees
from NYSE Arca, NYSE American, and CBOE BZX Options Exchange in
support of this statement. See id. at 37381 n.18. For a more
detailed description of the Exchange's justifications for the
proposed rule change, see Notice, supra note 5, at 37381-88.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange further states that its proposed fees are reasonable,
equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange, and its affiliates, Miami International Securities Exchange,
LLC and MIAX Emerald, LLC, are still recouping the initial expenditures
from building out their systems while the ``legacy'' exchanges have
already paid for and built their systems.\30\ The Exchange also
believes that removal of the Monthly Volume Credit and Trading Permit
fee credit is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because all market participants will no longer be offered the ability
to receive the credit and access to the Exchange is offered on terms
that are not unfairly discriminatory.\31\ In addition, the Exchange
states that these credits were offered in order to attract order flow
and membership after the Exchange first launched operations, and it is
now appropriate to remove these credits in light of the current
operating conditions of the Exchange.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37386.
\31\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37382-83.
\32\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37382-83.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange states that the proposed fees are equitably allocated,
not unfairly discriminatory, and do not impose an unnecessary or
inappropriate burden on competition because the Proposed Access Fees do
not favor certain categories of market participants,\33\ the difference
in Trading Permit fees for FIX versus MEO Interface users reflects the
fact FIX Interface utilizes less capacity and resources of the Exchange
while the MEO Interface offers lower latency and higher throughput,
which utilizes greater capacity and resources of the Exchange; \34\ and
options market participants are not forced to connect to (and purchase
Trading Permits) all options exchanges.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See id. at 37387.
\34\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 37381.
\35\ For a more detailed description of the Exchange's
justifications for the proposed rule change, see Notice, supra note
5, at 37381-88.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When exchanges file their proposed rule changes with the
Commission, including fee filings like the Exchange's present proposal,
they are required to provide a statement supporting the proposal's
basis under the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable
to the exchange.\36\ The instructions to Form 19b-4, on which exchanges
file their proposed rule changes, specify that such statement ``should
be sufficiently detailed and specific to support a finding that the
proposed rule change is consistent with [those] requirements.'' \37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See 17 CFR 240.19b-4 (Item 3 entitled ``Self-Regulatory
Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for,
the Proposed Rule Change'').
\37\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 6 of the Act, including Sections 6(b)(4), (5), and (8),
require the rules of an exchange to (1) provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable fees among members, issuers, and other persons
using the exchange's facilities; \38\ (2) perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national
[[Page 49402]]
market system, protect investors and the public interest, and not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers; \39\ and (3) not impose any burden on competition
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
\39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\40\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In temporarily suspending the Exchange's fee change, the Commission
intends to further consider whether the proposed rule change is
consistent with the statutory requirements applicable to a national
securities exchange under the Act. In particular, the Commission will
consider whether the proposed rule change satisfies the standards under
the Act and the rules thereunder requiring, among other things, that an
exchange's rules provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
fees among members, issuers, and other persons using its facilities;
not permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers or
dealers; and do not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the Commission finds that it is appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of investors, and otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, to temporarily suspend the
proposed rule change.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ For purposes of temporarily suspending the proposed rule
change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove the
Proposed Rule Change
In addition to temporarily suspending the proposal, the Commission
also hereby institutes proceedings pursuant to Sections 19(b)(3)(C)
\43\ and 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \44\ to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved. Institution of
proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any
conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, the
Commission seeks and encourages interested persons to provide
additional comment on the proposed rule change to inform the
Commission's analysis of whether to approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). Once the Commission temporarily
suspends a proposed rule change, Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act
requires that the Commission institute proceedings under Section
19(b)(2)(B) to determine whether a proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
\44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\45\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for possible disapproval under
consideration:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act also
provides that proceedings to determine whether to disapprove a
proposed rule change must be concluded within 180 days of the date
of publication of notice of the filing of the proposed rule change.
See id. The time for conclusion of the proceedings may be extended
for up to 60 days if the Commission finds good cause for such
extension and publishes its reasons for so finding, or if the
exchange consents to the longer period. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, which requires that the
rules of a national securities exchange ``provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and issuers and other persons using its facilities;'' \46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires, among other
things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be ``designed
to perfect the operation of a free and open market and a national
market system'' and ``protect investors and the public interest,'' and
not be ``designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers;'' \47\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, which requires that the
rules of a national securities exchange ``not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of [the Act].'' \48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in Section III above, the Exchange makes various
arguments in support of the proposal. The Commission believes that
there are questions as to whether the Exchange has provided sufficient
information to demonstrate that the proposal to remove certain credits
and increase monthly Trading Permit fees is consistent with the Act and
the rules thereunder.
Under the Commission's Rules of Practice, the ``burden to
demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the [Act]
and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is on the [SRO]
that proposed the rule change.'' \49\ 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,\50\ 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
Act and the applicable rules and regulations.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ 17 CFR 201.700(b)(3).
\50\ See id.
\51\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
consideration and comment on the issues raised herein, including as to
whether the proposal is consistent with the Act, specifically, with its
requirements that the rules of a national securities exchange provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its members, issuers, and other persons using its
facilities; are designed to perfect the operation of a free and open
market and a national market system, and to protect investors and the
public interest; are not designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers; and do not impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act; \52\ as well as any other
provision of the Act, or the rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Commission's Solicitation of Comments
The Commission requests written views, data, and arguments with
respect to the concerns identified above as well as any other relevant
concerns. Such comments should be submitted by September 23, 2021.
Rebuttal comments should be submitted by October 7, 2021. 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.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 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 an SRO. See Securities
Acts Amendments of 1975, Report of the Senate Committee on Banking,
Housing and Urban Affairs to Accompany S. 249, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th
Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency and
merit of the Exchange's statements in support of the proposal, in
addition to
[[Page 49403]]
any other comments they may wish to submit about the proposed rule
change.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the proposed rule change, including whether the
proposal 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-PEARL-2021-32 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-PEARL-2021-32. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2021-32 and should be submitted on
or before September 23, 2021. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by
October 7, 2021.
VI. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the
Act,\54\ that File Number SR-PEARL-2021-32 be and hereby is,
temporarily suspended. In addition, the Commission is instituting
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57) and (58).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-18948 Filed 9-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P