Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Options 7, Section 6, 7746-7750 [2024-02162]
Download as PDF
7746
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
Service request, the title of each Postal
Service request, the request’s acceptance
date, and the authority cited by the
Postal Service for each request. For each
request, the Commission appoints an
officer of the Commission to represent
the interests of the general public in the
proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505
(Public Representative). Section II also
establishes comment deadline(s)
pertaining to each request.
The public portions of the Postal
Service’s request(s) can be accessed via
the Commission’s website (https://
www.prc.gov). Non-public portions of
the Postal Service’s request(s), if any,
can be accessed through compliance
with the requirements of 39 CFR
3011.301.1
The Commission invites comments on
whether the Postal Service’s request(s)
in the captioned docket(s) are consistent
with the policies of title 39. For
request(s) that the Postal Service states
concern Market Dominant product(s),
applicable statutory and regulatory
requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39
U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3030, and 39
CFR part 3040, subpart B. For request(s)
that the Postal Service states concern
Competitive product(s), applicable
statutory and regulatory requirements
include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633,
39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3035, and
39 CFR part 3040, subpart B. Comment
deadline(s) for each request appear in
section II.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
II. Docketed Proceeding(s)
1. Docket No(s).: CP2023–45; Filing
Title: USPS Notice of Amendment to
Priority Mail, First-Class Package
Service & Parcel Select Contract 4, Filed
Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date:
January 30, 2024; Filing Authority: 39
CFR 3035.105; Public Representative:
Almaroof Agoro; Comments Due:
February 7, 2024.
2. Docket No(s).: MC2024–170 and
CP2024–176; Filing Title: USPS Request
to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground
Advantage Contract 177 to Competitive
Product List and Notice of Filing
Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance
Date: January 30, 2024; Filing Authority:
39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130
through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105;
Public Representative: Samuel
Robinson; Comments Due: February 7,
2024.
3. Docket No(s).: MC2024–171 and
CP2024–177; Filing Title: USPS Request
to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground
Advantage Contract 178 to Competitive
1 See Docket No. RM2018–3, Order Adopting
Final Rules Relating to Non-Public Information,
June 27, 2018, Attachment A at 19–22 (Order No.
4679).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Jkt 262001
Product List and Notice of Filing
Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance
Date: January 30, 2024; Filing Authority:
39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130
through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105;
Public Representative: Christopher C.
Mohr; Comments Due: February 7, 2024.
4. Docket No(s).: MC2024–172 and
CP2024–178; Filing Title: USPS Request
to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground
Advantage Contract 179 to Competitive
Product List and Notice of Filing
Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance
Date: January 30, 2024; Filing Authority:
39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130
through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105;
Public Representative: Christopher C.
Mohr; Comments Due: February 7, 2024.
5. Docket No(s).: MC2024–173 and
CP2024–179; Filing Title: USPS Request
to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority
Mail & USPS Ground Advantage
Contract 44 to Competitive Product List
and Notice of Filing Materials Under
Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: January
30, 2024; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C.
3642, 39 CFR 3040.130 through
3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105; Public
Representative: Christopher C. Mohr;
Comments Due: February 7, 2024.
6. Docket No(s).: MC2024–174 and
CP2024–180; Filing Title: USPS Request
to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority
Mail, USPS Ground Advantage & Parcel
Select Contract 4 to Competitive
Product List and Notice of Filing
Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance
Date: January 30, 2024; Filing Authority:
39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3040.130
through 3040.135, and 39 CFR 3035.105;
Public Representative: Christopher C.
Mohr; Comments Due: February 7, 2024.
This Notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
Jennie L. Jbara,
Alternate Certifying Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024–02188 Filed 2–2–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
notice is hereby given that on January
16, 2024, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (‘‘MRX’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III, 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.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend its
Rules at Options 7, Section 6, Ports and
Other Services.3
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/
rulebook/mrx/rules, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission’s Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
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
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–99451; File No. SR–MRX–
2024–02]
The Exchange proposes to amend
Options 7, Section 6, Ports and Other
Services. Specifically, the Exchange
proposes to amend the monthly caps for
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend Options 7,
Section 6
January 30, 2024.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
1 15
2 17
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3 The Exchange initially filed the proposed
pricing changes on November 28, 2023 (SR–MRX–
2023–23) to be effective on December 1, 2023. On
December 5, 2023, the Exchange withdrew SR–
MRX–2023–23 and replaced it with SR–MRX–
2023–25. On January 16, 2023, the Exchange
withdrew SR–MRX–2023–25 and submitted this
filing.
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
SQF Ports 4 and SQF Purge Ports.5 The
Exchange also proposes to remove
unnecessary rule text from Options 7,
Section 6 related to a technology
migration. Both changes are explained
below.
Today, MRX assesses $1,250 per port,
per month for an SQF Port as well as an
SQF Purge Port. Today, MRX waives
one SQF Port fee per Market Maker per
month. Also, today, SQF Ports and SQF
Purge Ports are subject to a monthly cap
of $17,500, which cap is applicable to
Market Makers.
At this time, the Exchange proposes to
increase the SQF Port and SQF Purge
Port monthly cap fee of $17,500 per
month to $27,500 per month.6 The
Exchange is not amending the $1,250
per port, per month SQF Port and SQF
Purge Port fees and the Exchange would
continue to waive one SQF Port fee per
Market Maker per month. As is the case
today, the Exchange would not assess a
Member an SQF Port or SQF Purge Port
fee beyond the monthly cap once the
Member has exceeded the monthly cap
for the respective month. Despite
increasing the monthly cap for SQF
4 ‘‘Specialized Quote Feed’’ or ‘‘SQF’’ is an
interface that allows Market Makers to connect,
send, and receive messages related to quotes,
Immediate-or-Cancel Orders, and auction responses
to the Exchange. Features include the following: (1)
options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying
and complex instruments); (2) system event
messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and
start of opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g.,
halts and resumes); (4) execution messages; (5)
quote messages; (6) Immediate-or-Cancel Order
messages; (7) risk protection triggers and purge
notifications; (8) opening imbalance messages; (9)
auction notifications; and (10) auction responses.
The SQF Purge Interface only receives and notifies
of purge requests from the Market Maker. Market
Makers may only enter interest into SQF in their
assigned options series. Immediate-or-Cancel
Orders entered into SQF are not subject to the (i)
Order Price Protection, Market Order Spread
Protection, and Size Limitation Protection in
Options 3, Section 15(a)(1)(A), (1)(B), and (2)(B)
respectively, for single leg orders, or (ii) Complex
Order Price Protection as defined in Options 3,
Section 16(c)(1) for Complex Orders. See
Supplementary Material .03(c) to Options 3, Section
7.
5 SQF Purge is a specific port for the SQF
interface that only receives and notifies of purge
requests from the Market Maker. Dedicated SQF
Purge Ports enable Market Makers to seamlessly
manage their ability to remove their quotes in a
swift manner. The SQF Purge Port is designed to
assist Market Makers in the management of, and
risk control over, their quotes. Market Makers may
utilize a purge port to reduce uncertainty and to
manage risk by purging all quotes in their assigned
options series. Of note, Market Makers may only
enter interest into SQF in their assigned options
series. Additionally, the SQF Purge Port may be
utilized by a Market Maker in the event that the
Member has a system issue and determines to purge
its quotes from the order book.
6 Today, 63% of Market Makers cap their SQF
Ports and SQF Purge Ports on MRX. The Exchange
notes that of the Market Makers currently registered
on MRX, there is a mix of size of Market Makers
that cap.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Jkt 262001
Ports and SQF Purge Ports from $17,500
per month to $27,500 per month, the
Exchange will continue to offer
Members the opportunity to cap their
SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees so
that they would not be assessed these
fees beyond the cap. Further, an MRX
Market Maker requires only one SQF
Port to submit quotes in its assigned
options series into MRX. An MRX
Market Maker may submit all quotes
through one SQF Port and utilize one
SQF Purge Port to view its purge
requests. While a Market Maker may
elect to obtain multiple SQF Ports and
SQF Purge Ports to organize its
business,7 only one SQF Port and SQF
Purge Port is necessary for a Market
Maker to fulfill its regulatory quoting
obligations.8
The Exchange proposes to remove the
italicized language in Options 7, Section
6 related to a technology migration that
took place in 2022. In 2022, MRX filed
a pricing change 9 to permit Members to
request certain duplicative ports at no
additional cost, from November 1, 2022
through December 30, 2022, to facilitate
a technology migration. The rule text
related to the 2022 technology migration
is no longer necessary because the
migration is complete and the pricing is
no longer applicable. At this time, the
Exchange proposes to remove this rule
text.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its
proposal is consistent with section 6(b)
of the Act,10 in general, and furthers the
objectives of sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5)
of the Act,11 in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among members and issuers and other
persons using any facility, and is not
designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The proposed pricing change to
increase the monthly cap applicable to
7 For example, a Market Maker may desire to
utilize multiple SQF Ports for accounting purposes,
to measure performance, for regulatory reasons or
other determinations that are specific to that
Member.
8 MRX Market Makers have various regulatory
requirements as provided for in Options 2, Section
4. Additionally, MRX Market Makers have certain
quoting requirements with respect to their assigned
options series as provided in Options 2, Section 5.
SQF Ports are the only quoting protocol available
on MRX and only Market Makers may utilize SQF
Ports. The same is true for SQF Purge Ports.
9 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 96120
(October 21, 2022), 87 FR 65105 (October 27, 2022)
(SR–MRX–2022–21) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
To Amend Options 7 in Connection With a
Technology Migration).
10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7747
SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports is
reasonable in several respects. As a
threshold matter, the Exchange is
subject to significant competitive forces
in the market for options securities
transaction services that constrain its
pricing determinations in that market.
The fact that this market is competitive
has 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’. . . .’’ 12
The Commission and the courts have
repeatedly expressed their preference
for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities
markets. In Regulation NMS, while
adopting a series of steps to improve the
current market model, 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
Numerous indicia demonstrate the
competitive nature of this market.
Within this environment, market
participants can freely and often do shift
their order flow among the Exchange
and competing venues in response to
changes in their respective pricing
schedules.
The proposed pricing change to
increase the SQF Port and SQF Purge
Port monthly cap from $17,500 per
month to $27,500 per month is
reasonable because despite the increase
in the monthly cap, the Exchange will
continue to offer Members the
opportunity to cap their SQF Port and
SQF Purge Port fees so that they would
not be assessed these fees beyond the
cap. Additionally, an MRX Market
Maker requires only one SQF Port to
submit quotes in its assigned options
12 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)).
13 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005)
(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’).
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
7748
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
series into MRX. An MRX Market Maker
may submit all quotes through one SQF
Port and utilize one SQF Purge Port to
view its purge requests. While a Market
Maker may elect to obtain multiple SQF
Ports and SQF Purge Ports to organize
its business,14 only one SQF Port and
SQF Purge Port is necessary for a Market
Maker to fulfill its regulatory quoting
obligations.15 Additionally, the
Exchange believes that the caps are
reasonable for two reasons.
First, SQF Ports are a secure method
for Market Makers to submit quotes into
the Exchange’s match engine and for the
Exchange to send messages related to
those quotes to Market Makers. MRX
must manage the security and message
traffic, among other things, for each
port. Utilizing the cap to manage a
Market Maker’s costs while also
managing the quantity of SQF Ports
issued on MRX has led the Exchange to
select $27,500 as the amended monthly
cap for SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports.
By capping the ports at a different level,
the Exchange is considering the message
traffic and message rates associated with
the current number of outstanding ports
and its ability to process messages. The
ability to have a cap and amend that cap
permits the Exchange to scale its needs
with respect to processing messages in
an efficient manner.
Second, the Exchange notes that
multiple ports are not necessary,
however, to the extent that some Market
Makers elect to obtain multiple ports,
the Exchange is offering to cap their
total port cost at $27,500 per month.
MRX believes the existence of a cap
allows for efficiencies and permits
Market Makers to increase their number
of ports beyond the cap. The cap levels
the playing field by allowing those
Market Makers that want to obtain a
larger number of ports to do so with the
certainty of a fee cap. Without the cap,
MRX Market Makers may pay more to
obtain multiple ports on MRX.
The Exchange’s proposed pricing
change to increase the SQF Port and
SQF Purge Port monthly cap from
$17,500 per month to $27,500 per
month is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange
would uniformly not assess any Market
14 For example, a Market Maker or may desire to
utilize multiple SQF Ports for accounting purposes,
to measure performance, for regulatory reasons or
other determinations that are specific to that
Member.
15 MRX Market Makers have various regulatory
requirements as provided for in Options 2, Section
4. Additionally, MRX Market Makers have certain
quoting requirements with respect to their assigned
options series as provided in Options 2, Section 5.
SQF Ports are the only quoting protocol available
on MRX and only Market Makers may utilize SQF
Ports.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Jkt 262001
Makers that exceeded the proposed
monthly cap any SQF Port and SQF
Purge Port fees for that month beyond
the cap. Market Makers are the only
market participants that are assessed
SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees
because they are the only market
participants that are permitted to quote
on the Exchange. Unlike other market
participants, Market Makers are subject
to market making and quoting
obligations.16 These liquidity providers
are critical market participants in that
they are the only market participants
that provide liquidity to MRX on a
continuous basis. In addition, the
Exchange notes that Lead Market
Makers are required to submit quotes in
the Opening Process to open an options
series.17 Market Makers are subject to a
number of fees, unlike other market
participants. Market Makers pay
separate Membership Fees,18 and CMM
Trading Right Fees,19 in addition to
other fees paid by other market
participants. Providing Market Makers a
means to cap their cost related to
quoting and enabling all Market Makers
to acquire SQF Ports and SQF Purge
Ports at no cost beyond a certain dollar
amount enables these market
participants to provide the necessary
liquidity to MRX at lower costs.
In 2022, NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE
Arca’’) proposed to restructure fees
relating to OTPs for Market Makers.20 In
that rule change,21 NYSE Arca argued
that,
Market Makers serve a unique and
important function on the Exchange (and
other options exchanges) given the quotedriven nature of options markets. Because
options exchanges rely on actively quoting
Market Makers to facilitate a robust
marketplace that attracts order flow, options
exchanges must attract and retain Market
Makers, including by setting competitive
Market Maker permit fees. Stated otherwise,
changes to Market Maker permit fees can
have a direct effect on the ability of an
exchange to compete for order flow. The
Exchange also believes that the number of
options exchanges on which Market Makers
can effect option transactions also ensures
competition in the marketplace and
constrains the ability of exchanges to charge
supracompetitive fees for access to its market
by Market Makers.
16 See
Options 2, Sections 4 and 5.
Options 3, Section 8.
18 See Options 7, Section 5, E.
19 See Options 7, Section 5, F.
20 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95412
(June 23, 2022), 87 FR 38786 (June 29, 2022) (SR–
NYSEArca–2022–36). NYSE Arca proposed to
increase both the monthly fee per Market Maker
OTP and the number of issues covered by each
additional OTP because, among other reasons, the
number of issues traded on the Exchange has
increased significantly in recent years.
21 Id at 38788.
17 See
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Further, NYSE ARCA noted that,22
The Exchange further believes that its
ability to set Market Maker permit fees is
constrained by competitive forces based on
the fact that Market Makers can, and have,
chosen to terminate their status as a Market
Maker if they deem Market Maker permit fees
to be unreasonable or excessive. Specifically,
the Exchange notes that a BOX participant
modified its access to BOX in connection
with the implementation of a proposed
change to BOX’s Market Maker permit fees.
The Exchange has also observed that another
options exchange group experienced
decreases in market share following its
proposed modifications of its access fees
(including Market Maker trading permit fees),
suggesting that market participants
(including Market Makers) are sensitive to
changes in exchanges’ access fees and may
respond by shifting their order flow
elsewhere if they deem the fees to be
unreasonable or excessive.
There is no requirement, regulatory or
otherwise, that any Market Maker connect to
and access any (or all of) the available
options exchanges. The Exchange also is not
aware of any reason why a Market Maker
could not cease being a permit holder in
response to unreasonable price increases.
The Exchange does not assess any
termination fee for a Market Maker to drop
its OTP, nor is the Exchange aware of any
other costs that would be incurred by a
Market Maker to do so.
The Exchange likewise believes that
its ability to cap SQF Port and SQF
Purge fees is constrained by competitive
forces and that its proposed
modifications to the SQF Port and SQF
Purge Fee cap is reasonably designed in
consideration of the competitive
environment in which the Exchange
operates, by balancing the value of the
enhanced benefits available to Market
Makers due to the current level of
activity on the Exchange with a fee
structure that will continue to incent
Market Makers to support increased
liquidity, quote competition, and
trading opportunities on the Exchange,
for the benefit of all market participants.
The Exchange’s proposal to remove
the italicized language in Options 7,
Section 6 related to a technology
migration that took place in 2022 is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the rule text
related to the technology migration is no
longer necessary because the migration
is complete and the fees are no longer
applicable. No Member is subject to the
pricing described for the 2022
technology migration.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
22 Id
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
at 38790.
05FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
Intermarket Competition
The proposal does not impose an
undue burden on intermarket
competition. The Exchange believes its
proposal remains competitive with
other options markets who also offer
order entry protocols. The Exchange
notes 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. In such
an environment, the Exchange must
continually adjust its fees to remain
competitive with other exchanges.
Because competitors are free to modify
their own fees in response, and because
market participants may readily adjust
their order routing practices, the
Exchange believes that the degree to
which fee changes in this market may
impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited. Other exchanges
have been permitted to amend certain
costs attributed to Market Makers.23
Further, in 2022, MRX proposed a
monthly cap for SQF Ports and SQF
Purge Ports of 17,500.24 MRX noted in
its rule change that, ‘‘Only one SQF
quote protocol is required for an MRX
Market Maker to submit quotes into
MRX and to meet its regulatory
requirements.’’ 25
If the Commission were to apply a
different standard of review this
proposal than it applied to other
exchange fee filings, where Market
Maker fees were increased and port fee
caps were established, it would create a
burden on competition such that it
would impair MRX’s ability to compete
among other options markets.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Intramarket Competition
The Exchange’s proposed pricing
change to increase the SQF Port and
SQF Purge Port monthly cap from
$17,500 per month to $27,500 per
month does not impose an undue
burden on competition because the
Exchange would uniformly not assess
any Market Makers that exceeded the
proposed monthly cap any SQF Port
and SQF Purge Port fees for that month
beyond the cap. Market Makers are the
only market participants that are
23 See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95412
(June 23, 2022), 87 FR 38786 (June 29, 2022) (SR–
NYSEArca–2022–36).
24 See Securities Exchange Act No. 96824
(February 7, 2023), 88 FR 8975 (February 10, 2023)
(SR–MRX–2023–05) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
To Amend MRX Options 7, Section 6).
25 Id at 8976.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Jkt 262001
assessed SQF Port and SQF Purge Port
fees because they are the only market
participants that are permitted to quote
on the Exchange. Unlike other market
participants, Market Makers are subject
to market making and quoting
obligations.26 These liquidity providers
are critical market participants in that
they are the only market participants
that provide liquidity to MRX on a
continuous basis. In addition, the
Exchange notes that Lead Market
Makers are required to submit quotes in
the Opening Process to open an options
series.27 Market Makers are subject to a
number of fees, unlike other market
participants. Market Makers pay
separate Membership Fees,28 and CMM
Trading Right Fees,29 in addition to
other fees paid by other market
participants. Providing Market Makers a
means to cap their cost related to
quoting and enabling all Market Makers
to acquire SQF Ports and SQF Purge
Ports at no cost beyond a certain dollar
amount enables these market
participants to provide the necessary
liquidity to MRX at lower costs.
Therefore, because Market Makers fulfill
a unique role on the Exchange, are the
only market participant required to
submit quotes as part of their
obligations to operate on the Exchange,
and, in light of that role, they are
eligible for certain incentives. The
proposed SQF Port and SQF Purge Fee
cap is designed to continue to incent
Market Makers to quote on MRX,
thereby promoting liquidity, quote
competition, and trading opportunities.
The Exchange’s proposal to remove
the italicized language in Options 7,
Section 6 related to a technology
migration that took place in 2022 does
not impose an undue burden on
competition because the rule text
related to the technology migration is no
longer necessary because the migration
is complete and the fees are no longer
applicable. No Member is subject to the
pricing described for the 2022
technology migration.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either
solicited or received.
26 See
Options 2, Sections 4 and 5.
Options 3, Section 8.
28 See Options 7, Section 5, E.
29 See Options 7, Section 5, F.
27 See
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7749
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)(ii) of the Act.30 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: (i)
necessary or appropriate in the public
interest; (ii) for the protection of
investors; or (iii) 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:
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–
MRX–2024–02 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–MRX–2024–02. 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,
30 15
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
05FEN1
7750
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also
will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. Do not include personal
identifiable information in submissions;
you should submit only information
that you wish to make available
publicly. We may redact in part or
withhold entirely from publication
submitted material that is obscene or
subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number
SR–MRX–2024–02 and should be
submitted on or before February 26,
2024.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.31
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–02162 Filed 2–2–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–99449; File No. SR–
NYSEAMER–2024–06]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
American LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Modify the NYSE
American Options Fee Schedule
January 30, 2024.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) 1 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3
notice is hereby given that, on January
25, 2024, NYSE American LLC (‘‘NYSE
American’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) 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 self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to modify the
NYSE American Options Fee Schedule
(‘‘Fee Schedule’’). The Exchange
proposes to implement the fee change
effective January 25, 2024.4 The
31 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 15 U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
4 The Exchange originally filed to amend the Fee
Schedule on January 2, 2024 (NYSEAmer–2023–69)
1 15
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Jkt 262001
proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange’s website at www.nyse.com, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
self-regulatory organization included
statements concerning the purpose of,
and basis for, the proposed rule change
and discussed any comments it received
on the proposed rule change. The text
of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below.
The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below,
of the most significant parts of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The purpose of this filing [sic] to
amend the Fee Schedule in a number of
ways as described herein. The Exchange
proposes to implement the rule change
on January 25, 2024.
First, the Exchange proposes to
modify the Fee Schedule to remove
reference to costs that are no longer
charged and are therefore inapplicable.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
modify the Fee Schedule to remove
‘‘Login’’ costs from Sections III.E.1 and
IV and to remove ‘‘Floor Broker
Handheld’’ costs from Section IV.
Next, the Exchange proposes to
modify the Floor Broker Fixed Cost
Prepayment Incentive Program (the ‘‘FB
Prepay Program’’ or ‘‘Program’’), a
prepayment incentive program that
allows Floor Brokers to prepay certain
of their annual Eligible Fixed Costs in
exchange for the opportunity to qualify
for certain volume rebates.5 Specifically,
the Manual Billable Volume Rebate is
designed to encourage Floor Brokers to
increase their monthly volume in
[sic] and withdrew such filing on January 12, 2024
(SR–NYSEAmer–2024–05) [sic], which latter filing
the Exchange withdrew on January 25, 2024.
5 See Fee Schedule, Section III.E.1., Floor Broker
Fixed Cost Prepayment Incentive Program (the ‘‘FB
Prepay Program’’). ‘‘Eligible Fixed Costs’’ include
monthly ATP Fees, the Floor Access Fee, and
certain monthly Floor communication,
connectivity, equipment and booth or podia fees, as
set forth in the table in Section III.E.1. The
Exchange notes that the FB Prepay Program is
currently structured similarly to the Floor Broker
prepayment program offered by its affiliated
exchange, NYSE Arca, Inc. (‘‘NYSE Arca’’). See
NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule, FLOOR BROKER
FIXED COST PREPAYMENT INCENTIVE
PROGRAM (the ‘‘FB Prepay Program’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
billable manual contract sides to qualify
for a rebate; increasing volumes qualify
the Floor Broker for a higher level of
rebate. Additional rebates may be
earned by meeting the qualification
levels of the Floor Broker Manual
Billable Incentive Program.6
Participating Floor Brokers receive their
rebates payable on a monthly basis.7
Floor Brokers that wish to participate in
the FB Prepay Program for the following
calendar year must notify the Exchange
no later than the last business day of
December in the current year.8
The Exchange proposes to eliminate
the Floor Broker Manual Billable
Incentive Program and accompanying
monthly rebates 9 and instead provide
Floor Brokers participating in the FB
Prepay Program with enhanced
opportunities for monthly rebates based
on manual billable transaction volume
(the ‘‘Manual Billable Rebate Program’’)
and the QCC Billable Bonus Rebate. The
calculation of volume on which rebates
earned through the Manual Billable
Rebate Program would be paid is based
on transactions for which at least one
side is subject to manual transaction
fees and excludes volume from QCC
transactions, unless otherwise
specified.10 The Exchange proposes to
6 See Fee Schedule, Section III.E.2., Floor Broker
Manual Billable Incentive Program.
7 See Fee Schedule, Section III.E. The Exchange
proposes to remove the preamble to Section III.E.,
which relates to the Exchange’s already-completed
migration to the Pillar trading platform, because the
text is no longer applicable and its removal would
add clarity to the Fee Schedule. See proposed Fee
Schedule, Section III.E.
8 See Fee Schedule, Section III.E (providing, in
relevant part, that the notification ‘‘email to enroll
in the Program must originate from an officer of the
Floor Broker organization and, except as provided
for below, represents a binding commitment
through the end of the following calendar year.’’).
The Exchange proposes to modify Section III.E. of
the Fee Schedule to remove the now obsolete
phrase ‘‘except as provided for below,’’ as there is
no exception to the notification requirement, which
modification will add clarity, transparency, and
internal consistency to the Fee Schedule. See
proposed Fee Schedule, Section III.E.
9 To effect the proposed change to eliminate the
Floor Broker Manual Billable Incentive Program
and related rebates, the Exchange proposes to delete
in its entirety Section III.E.2. of the Fee Schedule.
In addition, for consistency, the Exchange proposes
to delete from the Table of Contents reference to
this Section III.E.2., which is currently (and
erroneously) listed as ‘‘Reserved’’. See proposed Fee
Schedule, Table of Contents.
10 See proposed Fee Schedule, Section III.E.1
(excluding QCC transactions from volume
calculation ‘‘unless otherwise specified’’), which
would add clarity, transparency, and internal
consistency to the Fee Schedule. For certain volume
thresholds (i.e., those based solely on ‘‘manual
billable sides’’), the Exchange proposes to continue
to exclude QCC volume from the calculation of
eligible volume for rebates paid through the Manual
Billable Rebate Program because Floor Brokers
would continue to be eligible for separate credits
and rebates for QCC transactions through the QCC
Billable Bonus Rebate.
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 24 (Monday, February 5, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7746-7750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02162]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-99451; File No. SR-MRX-2024-02]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Options 7,
Section 6
January 30, 2024.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 16, 2024, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (``MRX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend its Rules at Options 7, Section 6,
Ports and Other Services.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed pricing changes on
November 28, 2023 (SR-MRX-2023-23) to be effective on December 1,
2023. On December 5, 2023, the Exchange withdrew SR-MRX-2023-23 and
replaced it with SR-MRX-2023-25. On January 16, 2023, the Exchange
withdrew SR-MRX-2023-25 and submitted this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/mrx/rules, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the 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 Options 7, Section 6, Ports and
Other Services. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend the
monthly caps for
[[Page 7747]]
SQF Ports \4\ and SQF Purge Ports.\5\ The Exchange also proposes to
remove unnecessary rule text from Options 7, Section 6 related to a
technology migration. Both changes are explained below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Specialized Quote Feed'' or ``SQF'' is an interface that
allows Market Makers to connect, send, and receive messages related
to quotes, Immediate-or-Cancel Orders, and auction responses to the
Exchange. Features include the following: (1) options symbol
directory messages (e.g., underlying and complex instruments); (2)
system event messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and
start of opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g., halts and
resumes); (4) execution messages; (5) quote messages; (6) Immediate-
or-Cancel Order messages; (7) risk protection triggers and purge
notifications; (8) opening imbalance messages; (9) auction
notifications; and (10) auction responses. The SQF Purge Interface
only receives and notifies of purge requests from the Market Maker.
Market Makers may only enter interest into SQF in their assigned
options series. Immediate-or-Cancel Orders entered into SQF are not
subject to the (i) Order Price Protection, Market Order Spread
Protection, and Size Limitation Protection in Options 3, Section
15(a)(1)(A), (1)(B), and (2)(B) respectively, for single leg orders,
or (ii) Complex Order Price Protection as defined in Options 3,
Section 16(c)(1) for Complex Orders. See Supplementary Material
.03(c) to Options 3, Section 7.
\5\ SQF Purge is a specific port for the SQF interface that only
receives and notifies of purge requests from the Market Maker.
Dedicated SQF Purge Ports enable Market Makers to seamlessly manage
their ability to remove their quotes in a swift manner. The SQF
Purge Port is designed to assist Market Makers in the management of,
and risk control over, their quotes. Market Makers may utilize a
purge port to reduce uncertainty and to manage risk by purging all
quotes in their assigned options series. Of note, Market Makers may
only enter interest into SQF in their assigned options series.
Additionally, the SQF Purge Port may be utilized by a Market Maker
in the event that the Member has a system issue and determines to
purge its quotes from the order book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today, MRX assesses $1,250 per port, per month for an SQF Port as
well as an SQF Purge Port. Today, MRX waives one SQF Port fee per
Market Maker per month. Also, today, SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports are
subject to a monthly cap of $17,500, which cap is applicable to Market
Makers.
At this time, the Exchange proposes to increase the SQF Port and
SQF Purge Port monthly cap fee of $17,500 per month to $27,500 per
month.\6\ The Exchange is not amending the $1,250 per port, per month
SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees and the Exchange would continue to
waive one SQF Port fee per Market Maker per month. As is the case
today, the Exchange would not assess a Member an SQF Port or SQF Purge
Port fee beyond the monthly cap once the Member has exceeded the
monthly cap for the respective month. Despite increasing the monthly
cap for SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports from $17,500 per month to $27,500
per month, the Exchange will continue to offer Members the opportunity
to cap their SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees so that they would not be
assessed these fees beyond the cap. Further, an MRX Market Maker
requires only one SQF Port to submit quotes in its assigned options
series into MRX. An MRX Market Maker may submit all quotes through one
SQF Port and utilize one SQF Purge Port to view its purge requests.
While a Market Maker may elect to obtain multiple SQF Ports and SQF
Purge Ports to organize its business,\7\ only one SQF Port and SQF
Purge Port is necessary for a Market Maker to fulfill its regulatory
quoting obligations.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Today, 63% of Market Makers cap their SQF Ports and SQF
Purge Ports on MRX. The Exchange notes that of the Market Makers
currently registered on MRX, there is a mix of size of Market Makers
that cap.
\7\ For example, a Market Maker may desire to utilize multiple
SQF Ports for accounting purposes, to measure performance, for
regulatory reasons or other determinations that are specific to that
Member.
\8\ MRX Market Makers have various regulatory requirements as
provided for in Options 2, Section 4. Additionally, MRX Market
Makers have certain quoting requirements with respect to their
assigned options series as provided in Options 2, Section 5. SQF
Ports are the only quoting protocol available on MRX and only Market
Makers may utilize SQF Ports. The same is true for SQF Purge Ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to remove the italicized language in Options
7, Section 6 related to a technology migration that took place in 2022.
In 2022, MRX filed a pricing change \9\ to permit Members to request
certain duplicative ports at no additional cost, from November 1, 2022
through December 30, 2022, to facilitate a technology migration. The
rule text related to the 2022 technology migration is no longer
necessary because the migration is complete and the pricing is no
longer applicable. At this time, the Exchange proposes to remove this
rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 96120 (October 21,
2022), 87 FR 65105 (October 27, 2022) (SR-MRX-2022-21) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Options 7 in Connection With a Technology Migration).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section
6(b) of the Act,\10\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed pricing change to increase the monthly cap applicable
to SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports is reasonable in several respects. As
a threshold matter, the Exchange is subject to significant competitive
forces in the market for options securities transaction services that
constrain its pricing determinations in that market. The fact that this
market is competitive has 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'. . . .'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 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)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation
NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market
model, 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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005),
70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numerous indicia demonstrate the competitive nature of this market.
Within this environment, market participants can freely and often do
shift their order flow among the Exchange and competing venues in
response to changes in their respective pricing schedules.
The proposed pricing change to increase the SQF Port and SQF Purge
Port monthly cap from $17,500 per month to $27,500 per month is
reasonable because despite the increase in the monthly cap, the
Exchange will continue to offer Members the opportunity to cap their
SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees so that they would not be assessed
these fees beyond the cap. Additionally, an MRX Market Maker requires
only one SQF Port to submit quotes in its assigned options
[[Page 7748]]
series into MRX. An MRX Market Maker may submit all quotes through one
SQF Port and utilize one SQF Purge Port to view its purge requests.
While a Market Maker may elect to obtain multiple SQF Ports and SQF
Purge Ports to organize its business,\14\ only one SQF Port and SQF
Purge Port is necessary for a Market Maker to fulfill its regulatory
quoting obligations.\15\ Additionally, the Exchange believes that the
caps are reasonable for two reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For example, a Market Maker or may desire to utilize
multiple SQF Ports for accounting purposes, to measure performance,
for regulatory reasons or other determinations that are specific to
that Member.
\15\ MRX Market Makers have various regulatory requirements as
provided for in Options 2, Section 4. Additionally, MRX Market
Makers have certain quoting requirements with respect to their
assigned options series as provided in Options 2, Section 5. SQF
Ports are the only quoting protocol available on MRX and only Market
Makers may utilize SQF Ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, SQF Ports are a secure method for Market Makers to submit
quotes into the Exchange's match engine and for the Exchange to send
messages related to those quotes to Market Makers. MRX must manage the
security and message traffic, among other things, for each port.
Utilizing the cap to manage a Market Maker's costs while also managing
the quantity of SQF Ports issued on MRX has led the Exchange to select
$27,500 as the amended monthly cap for SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports.
By capping the ports at a different level, the Exchange is considering
the message traffic and message rates associated with the current
number of outstanding ports and its ability to process messages. The
ability to have a cap and amend that cap permits the Exchange to scale
its needs with respect to processing messages in an efficient manner.
Second, the Exchange notes that multiple ports are not necessary,
however, to the extent that some Market Makers elect to obtain multiple
ports, the Exchange is offering to cap their total port cost at $27,500
per month. MRX believes the existence of a cap allows for efficiencies
and permits Market Makers to increase their number of ports beyond the
cap. The cap levels the playing field by allowing those Market Makers
that want to obtain a larger number of ports to do so with the
certainty of a fee cap. Without the cap, MRX Market Makers may pay more
to obtain multiple ports on MRX.
The Exchange's proposed pricing change to increase the SQF Port and
SQF Purge Port monthly cap from $17,500 per month to $27,500 per month
is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange would
uniformly not assess any Market Makers that exceeded the proposed
monthly cap any SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees for that month beyond
the cap. Market Makers are the only market participants that are
assessed SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees because they are the only
market participants that are permitted to quote on the Exchange. Unlike
other market participants, Market Makers are subject to market making
and quoting obligations.\16\ These liquidity providers are critical
market participants in that they are the only market participants that
provide liquidity to MRX on a continuous basis. In addition, the
Exchange notes that Lead Market Makers are required to submit quotes in
the Opening Process to open an options series.\17\ Market Makers are
subject to a number of fees, unlike other market participants. Market
Makers pay separate Membership Fees,\18\ and CMM Trading Right
Fees,\19\ in addition to other fees paid by other market participants.
Providing Market Makers a means to cap their cost related to quoting
and enabling all Market Makers to acquire SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports
at no cost beyond a certain dollar amount enables these market
participants to provide the necessary liquidity to MRX at lower costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Options 2, Sections 4 and 5.
\17\ See Options 3, Section 8.
\18\ See Options 7, Section 5, E.
\19\ See Options 7, Section 5, F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2022, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'') proposed to restructure
fees relating to OTPs for Market Makers.\20\ In that rule change,\21\
NYSE Arca argued that,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95412 (June 23,
2022), 87 FR 38786 (June 29, 2022) (SR-NYSEArca-2022-36). NYSE Arca
proposed to increase both the monthly fee per Market Maker OTP and
the number of issues covered by each additional OTP because, among
other reasons, the number of issues traded on the Exchange has
increased significantly in recent years.
\21\ Id at 38788.
Market Makers serve a unique and important function on the
Exchange (and other options exchanges) given the quote-driven nature
of options markets. Because options exchanges rely on actively
quoting Market Makers to facilitate a robust marketplace that
attracts order flow, options exchanges must attract and retain
Market Makers, including by setting competitive Market Maker permit
fees. Stated otherwise, changes to Market Maker permit fees can have
a direct effect on the ability of an exchange to compete for order
flow. The Exchange also believes that the number of options
exchanges on which Market Makers can effect option transactions also
ensures competition in the marketplace and constrains the ability of
exchanges to charge supracompetitive fees for access to its market
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Market Makers.
Further, NYSE ARCA noted that,\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Id at 38790.
The Exchange further believes that its ability to set Market
Maker permit fees is constrained by competitive forces based on the
fact that Market Makers can, and have, chosen to terminate their
status as a Market Maker if they deem Market Maker permit fees to be
unreasonable or excessive. Specifically, the Exchange notes that a
BOX participant modified its access to BOX in connection with the
implementation of a proposed change to BOX's Market Maker permit
fees. The Exchange has also observed that another options exchange
group experienced decreases in market share following its proposed
modifications of its access fees (including Market Maker trading
permit fees), suggesting that market participants (including Market
Makers) are sensitive to changes in exchanges' access fees and may
respond by shifting their order flow elsewhere if they deem the fees
to be unreasonable or excessive.
There is no requirement, regulatory or otherwise, that any
Market Maker connect to and access any (or all of) the available
options exchanges. The Exchange also is not aware of any reason why
a Market Maker could not cease being a permit holder in response to
unreasonable price increases. The Exchange does not assess any
termination fee for a Market Maker to drop its OTP, nor is the
Exchange aware of any other costs that would be incurred by a Market
Maker to do so.
The Exchange likewise believes that its ability to cap SQF Port and
SQF Purge fees is constrained by competitive forces and that its
proposed modifications to the SQF Port and SQF Purge Fee cap is
reasonably designed in consideration of the competitive environment in
which the Exchange operates, by balancing the value of the enhanced
benefits available to Market Makers due to the current level of
activity on the Exchange with a fee structure that will continue to
incent Market Makers to support increased liquidity, quote competition,
and trading opportunities on the Exchange, for the benefit of all
market participants.
The Exchange's proposal to remove the italicized language in
Options 7, Section 6 related to a technology migration that took place
in 2022 is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because the rule text related to the technology migration is no longer
necessary because the migration is complete and the fees are no longer
applicable. No Member is subject to the pricing described for the 2022
technology migration.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose
[[Page 7749]]
any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
Intermarket Competition
The proposal does not impose an undue burden on intermarket
competition. The Exchange believes its proposal remains competitive
with other options markets who also offer order entry protocols. The
Exchange notes 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. In such an environment,
the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive
with other exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own
fees in response, and because market participants may readily adjust
their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to
which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition
is extremely limited. Other exchanges have been permitted to amend
certain costs attributed to Market Makers.\23\ Further, in 2022, MRX
proposed a monthly cap for SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports of 17,500.\24\
MRX noted in its rule change that, ``Only one SQF quote protocol is
required for an MRX Market Maker to submit quotes into MRX and to meet
its regulatory requirements.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95412 (June 23,
2022), 87 FR 38786 (June 29, 2022) (SR-NYSEArca-2022-36).
\24\ See Securities Exchange Act No. 96824 (February 7, 2023),
88 FR 8975 (February 10, 2023) (SR-MRX-2023-05) (Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend MRX
Options 7, Section 6).
\25\ Id at 8976.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the Commission were to apply a different standard of review this
proposal than it applied to other exchange fee filings, where Market
Maker fees were increased and port fee caps were established, it would
create a burden on competition such that it would impair MRX's ability
to compete among other options markets.
Intramarket Competition
The Exchange's proposed pricing change to increase the SQF Port and
SQF Purge Port monthly cap from $17,500 per month to $27,500 per month
does not impose an undue burden on competition because the Exchange
would uniformly not assess any Market Makers that exceeded the proposed
monthly cap any SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees for that month beyond
the cap. Market Makers are the only market participants that are
assessed SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees because they are the only
market participants that are permitted to quote on the Exchange. Unlike
other market participants, Market Makers are subject to market making
and quoting obligations.\26\ These liquidity providers are critical
market participants in that they are the only market participants that
provide liquidity to MRX on a continuous basis. In addition, the
Exchange notes that Lead Market Makers are required to submit quotes in
the Opening Process to open an options series.\27\ Market Makers are
subject to a number of fees, unlike other market participants. Market
Makers pay separate Membership Fees,\28\ and CMM Trading Right
Fees,\29\ in addition to other fees paid by other market participants.
Providing Market Makers a means to cap their cost related to quoting
and enabling all Market Makers to acquire SQF Ports and SQF Purge Ports
at no cost beyond a certain dollar amount enables these market
participants to provide the necessary liquidity to MRX at lower costs.
Therefore, because Market Makers fulfill a unique role on the Exchange,
are the only market participant required to submit quotes as part of
their obligations to operate on the Exchange, and, in light of that
role, they are eligible for certain incentives. The proposed SQF Port
and SQF Purge Fee cap is designed to continue to incent Market Makers
to quote on MRX, thereby promoting liquidity, quote competition, and
trading opportunities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Options 2, Sections 4 and 5.
\27\ See Options 3, Section 8.
\28\ See Options 7, Section 5, E.
\29\ See Options 7, Section 5, F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal to remove the italicized language in
Options 7, Section 6 related to a technology migration that took place
in 2022 does not impose an undue burden on competition because the rule
text related to the technology migration is no longer necessary because
the migration is complete and the fees are no longer applicable. No
Member is subject to the pricing described for the 2022 technology
migration.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either solicited or received.
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)(ii) of the Act.\30\ 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: (i) necessary or appropriate in the public
interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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-MRX-2024-02 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-MRX-2024-02. 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,
[[Page 7750]]
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-MRX-2024-02 and should be
submitted on or before February 26, 2024.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-02162 Filed 2-2-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P