83 FR 55763 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Amend NYSE Rule 104 Governing Transactions by Designated Market Makers
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 216 (November 7, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 216 (November 7, 2018)
| Page Range | 55763-55765 | |
| FR Document | 2018-24303 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 7, 2018)] [Notices] [Pages 55763-55765] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-24303] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84515; File No. SR-NYSE-2018-34] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Amend NYSE Rule 104 Governing Transactions by Designated Market Makers November 1, 2018. I. Introduction On July 31, 2018, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend NYSE Rule 104 governing transactions by Designated Market Makers (``DMMs''). The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on August 16, 2018.\3\ On September 24, 2018, the Commission extended to November 14, 2018, the time period in which to approve, disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove, the proposal.\4\ The Commission has received no comments on the proposal. This order institutes proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \5\ to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4. \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83821 (Aug. 10, 2018), 83 FR 40808 (Aug. 16, 2018) (``Notice''). \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84276 (Sep. 24, 2018), 83 FR 49143 (Sep. 28, 2018). \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Summary of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 104, which governs the dealings and responsibilities of Designated Market Makers (``DMMs'') on the Exchange.\6\ According to the Exchange, the proposal would consolidate and restructure current Rules 104(g), (h), and (i), which would be deleted and incorporated into a new subsection (g) titled ``Transactions by DMMs.'' \7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ Details of the proposal rule change can be found in the Notice. See Notice, supra note 3. \7\ See id. at 40809-10. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 104 currently defines four types of DMM transactions. Current Rule 104(g) defines Neutral Transactions, Non-Conditional Transactions, and Prohibited Transactions, and current Rule 104(h) defines Conditional Transactions.\8\ The Exchange proposes to eliminate the definitions of Neutral Transactions, Non-Conditional Transactions, and Prohibited Transactions and to amend the rules regarding Conditional Transactions and rename them ``Aggressing Transactions'' under an amended Rule 104(g).\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See id. at 40808-09 (describing current provisions regarding these transaction types). \9\ See id. at 40809-10. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Exchange proposes to define an Aggressing Transaction in proposed Rule 104(g)(1)(A) as a DMM unit transaction that is (1) a purchase (sale) that reaches across the market to trade as the contra- side to the Exchange published offer (bid); and (2) priced above (below) the last differently-priced trade on the Exchange and above (below) the last differently-priced published offer (bid) on the Exchange.\10\ According to the Exchange, under proposed Rule 104(g)(1)(B), an Aggressing Transaction during the last ten seconds prior to the scheduled close of trading that would result in a new consolidated high (low) price for a security during that trading day would be prohibited, unless the transaction would bring the price of the security [[Page 55764]] into parity with an underlying or related security or asset.\11\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ See id. at 40810. \11\ See id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the Exchange, proposed Rule 104(g)(2)--``Re-Entry Obligations''--would provide that the DMM unit's obligation to maintain a fair and orderly market may require re-entry on the opposite side of the market after effecting one or more transactions.\12\ According to the Exchange, proposed Rule 104(g)(2) would provide that this re-entry should be commensurate with the size of the transactions and the immediate and anticipated needs of the market, and the Exchange states that these are the same requirements currently specified for Neutral and Non-Conditional Transactions and for certain Conditional Transactions.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ See id. at 40811. \13\ See id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Rule 104(g)(2)(A) would require that, after an Aggressing Transaction, a DMM unit must re-enter the opposite side of the market at or before the applicable Price Participation Point--which would be defined in proposed Rule 104(g)(3)--for that security, commensurate with the size of the Aggressing Transaction.\14\ Proposed Rule 104(g)(2)(B) would require that, following an Aggressing Transaction that is 10,000 shares or more or has a market value of $200,000 or more and exceeds 50% of the published offer (bid) size, the DMM unit must immediately re-enter the opposite side of the market at or before the applicable Price Participation Point for that security commensurate with the size of the Aggressing Transaction.\15\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ See id. \15\ See id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the Exchange, under proposed Rule 104(g)(3)(A), the Exchange would periodically issue Price Participation Point guidelines that identify the price at or before which a DMM unit is expected to re-enter the market following an Aggressing Transaction.\16\ Proposed Rule 104(g)(3)(A) would also provide that, the Price Participation Points are only minimum guidelines and compliance with them does not guarantee that a DMM unit is meeting its obligations.\17\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ See id. at 40812. \17\ See id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Rule 104(g)(3)(B) would provide that, notwithstanding that a security may not have reached the Price Participation Point, the DMM unit may be required to re-enter the market immediately after an Aggressing Transaction based on the price and/or volume of the DMM unit's trading in reference to the market in the security at the time of the trading.\18\ In such situations, proposed Rule 104(g)(3)(B) would state, DMM units may or may not rely on the fact and circumstance that there may have been one or more independent trades following the DMM unit's trading to justify a failure to re-enter the market.\19\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ See id. \19\ See id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove the Proposed Rule Change and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \20\ to determine whether the proposal should be approved or disapproved. Institution of proceedings is appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy issues raised by the proposal, as discussed below. Institution of disapproval proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, as described in greater detail below, the Commission seeks and encourages interested persons to provide additional comment on the proposal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act, the Commission is providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration. The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional analysis of the proposed rule change's consistency with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\21\ which requires that the rules of an exchange be designed, among other things, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest, and which prohibits the rules of an exchange from being designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers, and with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, which requires that the rules of an exchange not impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV. Solicitation of Comments The Commission requests that interested persons provide written submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the concerns identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written views of interested persons concerning whether the proposal is inconsistent with Section 6(b)(5) or any other provisions of the Act, or the rules and regulation thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or disapproval which 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.\22\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants the Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments regarding whether the proposal should be approved or disapproved by November 28, 2018. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by December 12, 2018. In particular, the Commission is interested in public comment on the following topics. 1. What are commenters' views regarding the Exchange's proposal to replace the existing rule against Prohibited Transactions, which is in effect during the last 10 minutes of trading, with the proposed prohibition of Aggressing Transactions during the last 10 seconds of trading that would result in a new consolidated high (low) price for a security during that trading day? \23\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \23\ As noted above, such transaction would be permitted if they would bring the price of the security into parity with an underlying security or asset. See supra note 11 & accompanying text. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Do commenters believe that a prohibition against Aggressing Transactions during the last 10 seconds of trading that would result in a new consolidated high (low) price for a security during that trading day would be sufficient to prevent DMMs from aggressively taking liquidity and moving prices on the Exchange immediately before the closing auction? Why or why not? What are commenters' views on the trading statistics offered by the Exchange to support its proposal to prohibit Aggressing Transactions only during the last 10 seconds of trading? \24\ Do commenters believe that a different [[Page 55765]] duration for such a prohibition would be preferable? If so, what duration and why? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ See Notice, supra note 3, 83 FR 40813, nn.14 & 18. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. What are commenters' views on the significance of the proposed change from the current prohibition against certain transactions that would set a new high or low price on the Exchange for the day to the proposed prohibition against certain transactions that would result in a new consolidated high or low price for the day? Do commenters believe that this change would have additional consequences for the operation of Rule 104? 4. What are commenters' views on how the obligations imposed on DMMs by proposed NYSE Rule 104 during the rest of the trading day would compare with the obligations imposed by current NYSE Rule 104? 5. What are commenters' views on the Exchange's argument that changes to NYSE Rule 104 would promote aggressive DMM quoting in their assigned securities? What are commenters' views on the Exchange's argument that DMMs are currently at a competitive disadvantage because of NYSE Rule 104 and that the current rule ``thwarts the ability of the DMM to meet their affirmative obligations to quote aggressively in assigned securities''? 6. What are commenters' views on whether the ``Price Participation Points'' that the Exchange provides to its DMMs would be sufficient under the proposed changes to NYSE Rule 104 to prevent DMMs from aggressively taking liquidity and moving prices on the Exchange immediately before the closing auction? 7. Existing Rules 104(g) and (h) refer to ``DMMs,'' and proposed Rule 104(g) would refer instead to ``DMM units.'' What are commenters' views of the significance, if any, of this change in wording? What are commenters' views on whether the amended rule should apply to the activities of individuals trading as DMMs on the Exchange floor? 8. Generally, would the Exchange's proposal maintain an appropriate balance between the benefits and obligations of being a DMM on the Exchange? \25\ In light of DMMs' special responsibility for closing auctions under NYSE rules, would the obligations of DMMs under NYSE rules be reasonably designed to prevent DMMs from inappropriately influencing or manipulating the close if the proposed rule change were approved? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ Current NYSE Rule 104 was originally approved as part of the NYSE pilot program called the ``New Market Model.'' See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58845 (Oct. 24, 2008), 73 FR 64379 (Oct. 29, 2008). As the Commission stated when approving the NYSE's proposal to conduct the New Market Model pilot, ``[w]e carefully review trading rule proposals that seek to offer special advantages to market makers. Although an exchange may reward such participants for the benefits they provide to the exchange's market, such reward must not be disproportionate to the services provided.'' See id. In 2015, the Commission permanently approved the New Market Model pilot and noted that the pilot had been conducted to seek ``further evidence that the benefits proposed for DMMs are not disproportionate to their obligations.'' See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75578 (July 31, 2015), 80 FR 47008 (Aug. 6, 2015). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic CommentsUse the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or Send an email to [email protected]. Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2018-34 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-NYSE-2018-34. 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 (http://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-NYSE-2018-34 and should be submitted on or before November 28, 2018. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by December 12, 2018. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.\26\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 2018-24303 Filed 11-6-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Notices 55763
organization and readability of the those that may be withheld from the 2018, the Commission extended to
Exchange’s Rulebook. The Commission public in accordance with the November 14, 2018, the time period in
believes that waiver of the 30-day provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be which to approve, disapprove, or
operative delay is consistent with the available for website viewing and institute proceedings to determine
protection of investors and the public printing in the Commission’s Public whether to approve or disapprove, the
interest. Accordingly, the Commission Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, proposal.4 The Commission has
hereby waives the operative delay and Washington, DC 20549, on official received no comments on the proposal.
designates the proposed rule change business days between the hours of This order institutes proceedings under
operative upon filing.13 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act 5 to
At any time within 60 days of the filing also will be available for determine whether to approve or
filing of the proposed rule change, the inspection and copying at the principal disapprove the proposal.
Commission summarily may office of the Exchange. All comments
temporarily suspend such rule change if II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
received will be posted without change. Change
it appears to the Commission that such Persons submitting comments are
action is necessary or appropriate in the cautioned that we do not redact or edit The Exchange proposes to amend
public interest, for the protection of personal identifying information from NYSE Rule 104, which governs the
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of comment submissions. You should dealings and responsibilities of
the purposes of the Act. If the submit only information that you wish Designated Market Makers (‘‘DMMs’’)
Commission takes such action, the to make available publicly. All on the Exchange.6 According to the
Commission shall institute proceedings submissions should refer to File Exchange, the proposal would
to determine whether the proposed rule Number SR–ISE–2018–89, and should consolidate and restructure current
change should be approved or be submitted on or before November 28, Rules 104(g), (h), and (i), which would
disapproved. 2018. be deleted and incorporated into a new
subsection (g) titled ‘‘Transactions by
IV. Solicitation of Comments For the Commission, by the Division of DMMs.’’ 7
Interested persons are invited to Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Rule 104 currently defines four types
submit written data, views, and authority.14
of DMM transactions. Current Rule
arguments concerning the foregoing, Eduardo A. Aleman, 104(g) defines Neutral Transactions,
including whether the proposed rule Assistant Secretary. Non-Conditional Transactions, and
change is consistent with the Act. [FR Doc. 2018–24310 Filed 11–6–18; 8:45 am] Prohibited Transactions, and current
Comments may be submitted by any of BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Rule 104(h) defines Conditional
the following methods: Transactions.8 The Exchange proposes
Electronic Comments to eliminate the definitions of Neutral
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Transactions, Non-Conditional
• Use the Commission’s internet COMMISSION Transactions, and Prohibited
comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Transactions and to amend the rules
[Release No. 34–84515; File No. SR–NYSE–
rules/sro.shtml); or 2018–34] regarding Conditional Transactions and
• Send an email to rule-comments@ rename them ‘‘Aggressing Transactions’’
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Self-Regulatory Organizations; New under an amended Rule 104(g).9
ISE–2018–89 on the subject line. York Stock Exchange LLC; Order The Exchange proposes to define an
Paper Comments Instituting Proceedings To Determine Aggressing Transaction in proposed
Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Rule 104(g)(1)(A) as a DMM unit
• Send paper comments in triplicate
Proposed Rule Change To Amend transaction that is (1) a purchase (sale)
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
NYSE Rule 104 Governing that reaches across the market to trade
Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Transactions by Designated Market as the contra-side to the Exchange
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
Makers published offer (bid); and (2) priced
All submissions should refer to File above (below) the last differently-priced
Number SR–ISE–2018–89. This file November 1, 2018. trade on the Exchange and above
number should be included on the (below) the last differently-priced
I. Introduction
subject line if email is used. To help the published offer (bid) on the Exchange.10
Commission process and review your On July 31, 2018, New York Stock
According to the Exchange, under
comments more efficiently, please use Exchange LLC (‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE’’)
proposed Rule 104(g)(1)(B), an
only one method. The Commission will filed with the Securities and Exchange
Aggressing Transaction during the last
post all comments on the Commission’s Commission (‘‘Commission’’) pursuant
ten seconds prior to the scheduled close
internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
of trading that would result in a new
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule
consolidated high (low) price for a
submission, all subsequent 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule
security during that trading day would
amendments, all written statements change to amend NYSE Rule 104
be prohibited, unless the transaction
with respect to the proposed rule governing transactions by Designated
would bring the price of the security
change that are filed with the Market Makers (‘‘DMMs’’). The
Commission, and all written proposed rule change was published for 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84276
communications relating to the comment in the Federal Register on (Sep. 24, 2018), 83 FR 49143 (Sep. 28, 2018).
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
proposed rule change between the August 16, 2018.3 On September 24, 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
Commission and any person, other than 6 Details of the proposal rule change can be found
14 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). in the Notice. See Notice, supra note 3.
1 15 7 See id. at 40809–10.
13 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 8 See id. at 40808–09 (describing current
operative delay, the Commission also has
considered the proposed rule’s impact on 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83821 provisions regarding these transaction types).
9 See id. at 40809–10.
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See (Aug. 10, 2018), 83 FR 40808 (Aug. 16, 2018)
15 U.S.C. 78c(f). (‘‘Notice’’). 10 See id. at 40810.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:46 Nov 06, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07NON1.SGM 07NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_55979/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Notices 55765
duration for such a prohibition would responsibility for closing auctions under 2018. Rebuttal comments should be
be preferable? If so, what duration and NYSE rules, would the obligations of submitted by December 12, 2018.
why? DMMs under NYSE rules be reasonably For the Commission, by the Division of
3. What are commenters’ views on the designed to prevent DMMs from Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
significance of the proposed change inappropriately influencing or authority.26
from the current prohibition against manipulating the close if the proposed Eduardo A. Aleman,
certain transactions that would set a rule change were approved? Assistant Secretary.
new high or low price on the Exchange Comments may be submitted by any [FR Doc. 2018–24303 Filed 11–6–18; 8:45 am]
for the day to the proposed prohibition of the following methods: BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
against certain transactions that would
Electronic Comments
result in a new consolidated high or low
price for the day? Do commenters • Use the Commission’s internet SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
believe that this change would have comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ COMMISSION
additional consequences for the rules/sro.shtml); or
operation of Rule 104? • Send an email to rule-comments@ [Release No. 34–84520; File No. SR–BX–
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 2018–050]
4. What are commenters’ views on
how the obligations imposed on DMMs NYSE–2018–34 on the subject line. Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
by proposed NYSE Rule 104 during the Paper Comments BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
rest of the trading day would compare Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
with the obligations imposed by current • Send paper comments in triplicate
Rule Change To Add Definitions to
NYSE Rule 104? to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Chapter I, Section 1, Titled General
5. What are commenters’ views on the Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Provisions and Also Amend Chapter
Exchange’s argument that changes to Washington, DC 20549–1090.
VI, Section 18, Titled Risk Protections
NYSE Rule 104 would promote All submissions should refer to File
aggressive DMM quoting in their Number SR–NYSE–2018–34. This file November 1, 2018.
assigned securities? What are number should be included on the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
commenters’ views on the Exchange’s subject line if email is used. To help the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
argument that DMMs are currently at a Commission process and review your (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
competitive disadvantage because of comments more efficiently, please use notice is hereby given that on October
NYSE Rule 104 and that the current rule only one method. The Commission will 18, 2018, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (‘‘BX’’ or
‘‘thwarts the ability of the DMM to meet post all comments on the Commission’s ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
their affirmative obligations to quote internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ and Exchange Commission
aggressively in assigned securities’’? rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
6. What are commenters’ views on submission, all subsequent change as described in Items I and II
whether the ‘‘Price Participation Points’’ amendments, all written statements below, which Items have been prepared
that the Exchange provides to its DMMs with respect to the proposed rule by the Exchange. The Commission is
would be sufficient under the proposed change that are filed with the publishing this notice to solicit
changes to NYSE Rule 104 to prevent Commission, and all written comments on the proposed rule change
DMMs from aggressively taking communications relating to the from interested persons.
liquidity and moving prices on the proposed rule change between the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Exchange immediately before the Commission and any person, other than Statement of the Terms of Substance of
closing auction? those that may be withheld from the the Proposed Rule Change
7. Existing Rules 104(g) and (h) refer public in accordance with the
to ‘‘DMMs,’’ and proposed Rule 104(g) provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be The Exchange proposes to add
would refer instead to ‘‘DMM units.’’ available for website viewing and definitions to Chapter I, Section 1, titled
What are commenters’ views of the printing in the Commission’s Public ‘‘General Provisions’’ and also amend
significance, if any, of this change in Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Chapter VI, Section 18, titled, ‘‘Risk
wording? What are commenters’ views Washington, DC 20549, on official Protections.’’
on whether the amended rule should business days between the hours of The text of the proposed rule change
apply to the activities of individuals 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the is available on the Exchange’s website at
trading as DMMs on the Exchange floor? filing also will be available for http://nasdaqbx.cchwallstreet.com/, at
8. Generally, would the Exchange’s inspection and copying at the principal the principal office of the Exchange, and
proposal maintain an appropriate office of the Exchange. All comments at the Commission’s Public Reference
balance between the benefits and received will be posted without change. Room.
obligations of being a DMM on the Persons submitting comments are II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Exchange? 25 In light of DMMs’ special cautioned that we do not redact or edit Statement of the Purpose of, and
personal identifying information from Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
25 Current NYSE Rule 104 was originally
comment submissions. You should Change
approved as part of the NYSE pilot program called
submit only information that you wish
the ‘‘New Market Model.’’ See Securities Exchange In its filing with the Commission, the
Act Release No. 58845 (Oct. 24, 2008), 73 FR 64379 to make available publicly. All
Exchange included statements
(Oct. 29, 2008). As the Commission stated when submissions should refer to File
concerning the purpose of and basis for
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
approving the NYSE’s proposal to conduct the New Number SR–NYSE–2018–34 and should
Market Model pilot, ‘‘[w]e carefully review trading the proposed rule change and discussed
be submitted on or before November 28,
rule proposals that seek to offer special advantages any comments it received on the
to market makers. Although an exchange may proposed rule change. The text of these
reward such participants for the benefits they that the pilot had been conducted to seek ‘‘further
provide to the exchange’s market, such reward must evidence that the benefits proposed for DMMs are
26 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(57).
not be disproportionate to the services provided.’’ not disproportionate to their obligations.’’ See
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
See id. In 2015, the Commission permanently Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75578 (July 31,
approved the New Market Model pilot and noted 2015), 80 FR 47008 (Aug. 6, 2015). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:46 Nov 06, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07NON1.SGM 07NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_55979/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-11-07 00:04:48
Document Modified: 2018-11-07 00:04:48
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 55763 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR