Notice2024-02647
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Rule 6.62P-O
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
February 9, 2024
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 28 (Friday, February 9, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 28 (Friday, February 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9188-9192]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02647]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-99470; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2024-09]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Rule
6.62P-O
February 5, 2024.
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 23, 2024, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
\3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to modify Rule 6.62P-O (Orders and Modifiers)
to adopt electronic Customer Cross Order and Complex Customer Cross
Order functionality and to amend Rule 1.1 (Definitions) to clarify the
treatment of Professional Customer interest. The proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange's website at <a href="http://www.nyse.com">www.nyse.com</a>, 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 Exchange proposes to modify Rule 6.62P-O (Orders and Modifiers)
to adopt electronically-entered Customer Cross (``C2C'') Orders and
Complex Customer Cross (``Complex C2C'') Orders (collectively,
``Customer Cross Orders''). The Exchange also proposes to amend the
definition of ``Customer and Professional Customer'' (Rule 1.1.) to
clarify the treatment of Professional Customer interest.
Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2): Customer Cross Orders \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ To reflect the addition of Customer Cross Orders, the
Exchange proposes to amend current Rule 6.62P-O(g) by removing the
statement that ``[a] Cross Order is a Qualified Contingent Cross
(``QCC'') Order'' and retaining the title of ``Cross Orders''. In
addition, the Exchange proposes to update the title of paragraph
Rule 6.62P-O (g)(1) to ``Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'')
Orders.'' The Exchange believes that these proposed changes would
add clarity and transparency to, and improve the accuracy of, the
Exchange's rules. See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g) and (g)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to adopt rules governing electronically-
entered Customer Cross Orders, which rules are substantively identical
to the recently-adopted Customer Cross Orders on the Exchange's
affiliate, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2) (describing single-leg
and complex Customer Cross Orders). See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 99231 (December 22, 2023), 88 FR 89783 (December 28,
2023) (SR-NYSEAMER-2023-66) (immediately effective rule change to
adopt electronically-entered Customer Cross Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2) would describe Customer Cross Orders.
Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A) would provide that a C2C Order and a
Complex C2C Order must be comprised of a Customer (but not a
Professional Customer) order to buy and a Customer (but not a
Professional Customer) order to sell at the same price and for the same
quantity. The proposal to limit eligible interest to Customer but not
Professional Customer interest is substantively identical to the rules
of NYSE American.\6\ In addition, as proposed, a C2C Order or Complex
C2C Order that is not rejected on arrival would immediately trade in
full at its limit price.\7\ Further, proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A)
would provide that C2C Orders and Complex C2C Orders would not route
and may be entered with a Minimum Price Variation (``MPV'') of $0.01
regardless of the MPV of the options series.\8\ Finally, the proposed
Rule would specify that Commentary .01 to Rule 6.47A-O would apply to
Customer Cross Orders, which means that OTP Holders and OTP Firms may
not utilize Customer Cross Orders to increase their economic gain
without first giving other trading interest on the Exchange an
opportunity to participate in the trade or to trade at the transaction
price when the OTP Holder or OTP Firm was already bidding or offering
at that price.\9\ This proposed handling of Customer Cross Orders is
substantively identical to the rules on NYSE
[[Page 9189]]
American regarding the handling of such orders on that exchange.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(A).
\7\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A) (providing, in relevant
part, that ``[a] C2C Order or Complex C2C Order that is not rejected
per Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(B) [Execution of C2C Orders] or (C)
[Execution of Complex C2C Orders], respectively, will immediately
trade in full at its limit price'').
\8\ Rule 1.1 defines ``Minimum Price Variation'' or ``MPV'' as
the price variations established by the Exchange, which for quoting
and trading options traded on the Exchange are set forth in 6.72-
O(a).
\9\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A). See also Rule 6.47A-O,
Commentary .01.
\10\ See Rule 6.47A-O, Commentary .01 (providing an identical
prohibition to the one set forth in NYSE American Rule 935NY,
Commentary .01, which prevents order-senders from using the customer
crossing mechanism to increase economic gain without first providing
an opportunity of eligible interest to trade at the transaction
price of the cross order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(B) provides that a C2C Order that has
one option leg would be rejected if received when the NBBO is crossed
or if the C2C would trade at a price that (i) is at the same price as a
displayed Customer order on the Consolidated Book and (ii) is not at or
between the NBBO and the Exchange BBO. The Exchange believes that the
proposal would provide for the efficient entry and execution of C2C
Orders while continuing to protect same-priced, displayed Customer
interest (i.e., by ensuring that the C2C Order does not trade ahead of
displayed Customer interest resting in the Consolidated Book). As noted
above, the proposed C2C Orders would operate in a manner that is
identical to the handling of single-leg customer cross orders per NYSE
American rules.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C) would describe the Exchange's
pricing requirements for a Complex C2C Order, which requirements are
identical to those set forth in NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(C).
As is the case per NYSE American rules, to validate the price of a
Complex C2C Order, the Exchange would rely on the Derived BBO
(``DBBO'') as described in Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5).\12\ If the Exchange is
not able to calculate the DBBO for a complex strategy because of one of
the circumstances described in Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5)(B)-(C), the Exchange
will not execute an order for that strategy until the circumstance is
resolved.\13\ Consistent with this handling, the Exchange proposes that
it would reject a Complex C2C Order if the Exchange is unable to
calculate the DBBO for a leg of the Complex C2C Order per Rule 6.91P-
O(a)(5)(B) or (a)(5)(C).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The DBBO provides for the establishment of a derived
(theoretical) bid or offer for a particular complex strategy. See
Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5) (defining the DBBO and providing that the bid
(offer) price used to calculate the DBBO on each leg will be the
Exchange BB (BO) (if available), bound by the maximum allowable Away
Market Deviation). The Away Market Deviation, as defined in Rule
6.91P-O(a)(1), ensures that an ECO does not execute too far away
from the prevailing market. Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5) also provides for the
establishment of the DBBO in the absence of an Exchange BB (BO), or
ABB(ABO), or both. The Exchange's definition of DBBO and its use in
relation to Complex C2C Orders is identical to how this concept is
defined and utilized by NYSE American. Compare Rule 6.91P-O(a)(5)
with NYSE American Rule 980NYP(a)(5).
\13\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C). See also Rule 6.91P-
O(a)(5)(B) (providing that, ``[i]f, for a leg of a complex strategy,
there is neither an Exchange BBO nor an ABBO, the Exchange will not
allow the complex strategy to trade until, for that leg, there is
either an Exchange BB or BO, or an ABB or ABO, on at least one side
of the market'') and (a)(5)(C) (providing, in relevant part that,
``[i]f the best bid and offer prices (when not based solely on the
Exchange BBO) for a component leg of the complex strategy are locked
or crossed, the Exchange will not allow an ECO for that strategy to
execute against another ECO until this condition resolves''). This
proposed handling of Complex C2C Orders is identical to the handling
of such orders on NYSE American. Compare proposed Rule 6.62P-
O(g)(2)(C) with NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(C).
\14\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(B). See also NYSE American
Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C) provides that no option
leg of a Complex C2C Order will trade at a price worse than the
Exchange BBO and such order would be rejected if it fails to meet the
following requirements:
<bullet> the transaction price must be at or between the DBBO and
may not equal the DBBO if the DBBO is calculated using the Exchange BBO
and the Exchange BBO of any component of the complex strategy on either
side of the market includes displayed Customer interest. If the DBB
(DBO) includes displayed Customer interest on the Exchange, the
transaction price must improve the DBB (DBO) by at least one cent
($0.01) (per proposed Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C)(i)); and
<bullet> the transaction price must be at or between the best-
priced Complex Orders to buy and sell in the complex strategy and may
not equal the price of a resting Customer Complex Order (per proposed
Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C)(ii)).
As noted above the pricing requirements for the proposed Complex
C2C Orders are identical to NYSE American's requirement for such
orders.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(C)(i)-(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes a conforming change to Rule 6.91P-
O(b)(1) to include Complex Customer Cross Orders among the type of
Electronic Complex Orders available for trading on the Exchange, which
change would add clarity, transparency, and internal consistency to the
Exchange's rules.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See proposed Rule 6.91P-O(b)(1) (providing that Electronic
Complex Orders ``may be entered as Limit Orders, Limit Orders
designated as Complex Only Orders, Complex QCCs, or as Complex
Customer Cross Orders) (emphasis added). See also NYSE American Rule
980NYP(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 1.1: Definitions of Customer and Professional Customer
The Exchange proposes to modify the definition of ``Customer'' to
provide that, ``unless otherwise specified'', the definition of
``Customer'' includes a ``Professional Customer'', as described
below.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See proposed Rule (emphasis added). See also NYSE American
Rule 980NYP(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per Rule 1.1, for options traded on the Exchange, the terms
``Customer'' and ``Professional Customer'' do not include a broker or
dealer.\18\ When the Exchange adopted its definition of Professional
Customer nearly a decade ago, it noted that its definition was
``similar to designations that have been adopted by all other options
exchanges.'' \19\ At that time, however, the Exchange explicitly stated
that it was not proposing ``to revise any order execution or processing
rules, including its priority rules, to change the treatment of
Professional Customers'' but noted instead that ``Professional Customer
orders will be treated as Customer orders under Exchange rules for all
purposes, except those related to order marking.'' \20\ The Exchange
further noted that ``[a]s the only options Exchange to have not yet
adopted the Professional Customer definition, the Exchange's proposal
will allow OTP Holders to mark their Professional Customer orders
similarly regardless of whether the order is placed on the Exchange or
another options exchange'' and that adopting the Professional Customer
designation would ``facilitate cross-market initiatives (such as
harmonizing rules relating to Obvious Errors).'' \21\ Although the
Exchange was clear as to its intent when it adopted the Professional
Customer designation, it did not modify its definition of ``Customer''
to reflect this intention. Thus, for avoidance of doubt and consistent
with the Exchange's previously stated intent, the Exchange proposes to
modify the definition of Customer to include
[[Page 9190]]
Professional Customer, ``unless otherwise specified'' in Exchange
rules.\22\ The Exchange believes this rule change would add clarity and
transparency to the Exchange's rules, making them easier to navigate
and understand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Rule 1.1 (defining Customer and Professional Customer).
For order counting purposes, the term ``Professional Customer''
applies to an individual or organization that ``places more than 390
orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month
for its own beneficial account(s).'' See id.
\19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73665 (November 21,
2014), 79 FR 70907, 70908 at n. 7 (November 28, 2014) (SR-NYSEARCA-
2014-133) (immediately effective rule change to adopt the definition
of Professional Customer) (the ``2014 Proposal''). See id., 79 FR,
at 70908 at n. 7 (citing other options markets that had already
adopted the Professional Customer designation).
\20\ See id., 79 FR at 70908, n. 8 (specifying that, at that
time, at least two other options exchanges had adopted a definition
of Professional Customer that was the ``same'' as the Exchange's
then-proposed definition and that those exchanges likewise did ``not
treat Professional Customers differently than Customers for purposes
of execution or processing.''). Thus, from inception, the treatment
of market participants designated as Professional Customers differed
among options exchanges.
\21\ See id., 79 FR at 70908.
\22\ See proposed Rule 1.1 (providing that ``[f]or options
traded on the Exchange, the term `Customer' does not include a
broker or dealer and, unless otherwise specified, includes a
``Professional Customer''(emphasis added) See, e.g., proposed Rule
6.62P-O(g)(2) (specifying that Customer Cross Orders ``must be
comprised of a Customer (but not a Professional Customer) order to
buy and a Customer (but not a Professional Customer) order to sell
at the same price and for the same quantity'')).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation
Because of the technology changes associated with this proposed
rule change, the Exchange will announce the implementation date by
Trader Update, which, subject to effectiveness of this proposed rule
change, is anticipated to be in the first quarter of 2024.
2. Statutory Basis
The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934,\23\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\24\ in particular, because it is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed Customer Cross Orders (for
single-leg and complex interest) would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because the proposed rules would allow OTP Holders and OTP Firms
to electronically trade these types of crossing orders on the Exchange.
The proposed functionality would benefit investors and the public
interest because it would enhance and automate each order entry firms'
ability to submit two-sided Customer orders--i.e., Customer Cross
Orders (both single-leg and complex). As such, the proposed rule change
would provide OTP Holders and OTP Firms with an efficient means of
executing their Customer orders. In addition, the proposed Customer
Cross Orders would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system because OTP Holders
and OTP Firms would be given an additional way to execute single-leg
and Complex Orders on the Exchange. As noted herein, the proposed
Customer Cross Orders functionality is identical to functionality
described in the rules of the Exchange's affiliate, NYSE American.\25\
With this proposal, OTP Holders and OTP Firms would likewise have an
additional venue on which to execute two-sided Customer orders
electronically--i.e., Customer Cross Orders. As such, the proposed
order types may attract additional Customer order flow (both two-sided
and single-sided) to the Exchange, which may, in turn, result in
greater liquidity available for trading on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the proposed single-leg C2C Order type, the Exchange
believes that the adoption of this order type would provide for the
efficient entry and execution of C2C Orders while continuing to protect
same-priced, displayed Customer interest (i.e., by ensuring that the
C2C Order does not trade ahead of displayed Customer interest resting
in the Consolidated Book). Further, as noted herein, the proposed order
type is not new or novel because each C2C Order would operate in a
manner that is identical to the handling of single-leg customer cross
orders per the rules of NYSE American.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed Complex C2C Order would protect investors and the
public interest by assuring that these orders comply with the existing
priority and allocation rules applicable to the processing and
execution of Complex Orders per Rule 6.91P-O. In particular, the
proposed Complex C2C Orders would continue to protect same-priced,
displayed Customer interest and would ensure that Complex C2C Orders do
not trade ahead of such displayed Customer interest, whether in the leg
markets or as Customer Complex Orders. The Exchange believes the
proposed Complex C2C Orders would promote just and equitable principles
of trade because (as discussed herein) the proposed orders--which are
not new or novel--would operate in a manner that is identical to the
handling of complex customer cross orders per the rules of NYSE
American.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes the proposed amendment to the Rule 1.1
definition of Customer and Professional Customer would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because it would add clarity and transparency
to--and improve the accuracy of--the Exchange's rules making them
easier to comprehend to the benefit of all market participants.
Finally, the proposed conforming changes to Rules 6.62P-O(g) and
6.91P-O(b)(1) to accommodate the adoption of single-leg and Complex
Customer Cross Orders on the Exchange would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because the rule changes would add clarity and transparency to--
and improve the accuracy of--the Exchange's rules making them easier to
comprehend to the benefit of all market participants.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange's
proposal to adopt a new electronically-entered crossing order type
(i.e., the Customer Cross Order) would not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act. The Exchange believes that the proposed change would not
impose a burden on intra-market competition because the proposed order
types would provide OTP Holders and OTP Firms with the option of
utilizing another means of executing two-sided Customer interest--both
single-leg and Complex Orders on the Exchange. The proposed change
would also benefit investors by providing another venue (i.e., in
addition to NYSE American) on which Customer Cross Orders may be
submitted electronically.
The Exchange believes that the proposed change would enhance
intermarket competition. The Exchange believes that adopting Customer
Cross Orders would promote competition as it would afford OTP Holders
and OTP Firms another venue on which to execute two-sided Customer
orders for single-leg and complex trading interest. Further, the
Exchange anticipates that this proposal will create new opportunities
for the Exchange to attract new business to the Exchange. As such, the
Exchange believes that this proposal does not create an undue burden on
intermarket competition. Rather, the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule would bolster intermarket competition by promoting fair
competition among individual markets.
The Exchange does not believe the proposed amendment to the Rule
1.1
[[Page 9191]]
definition of Customer and Professional Customer would impose any undue
burden on intra-market or intermarket competition as all market
participants on the Exchange would be subject to the updated
definition. In addition, the proposal to limit the availability of the
proposed Customer Cross Orders to interest submitted on behalf of
Customers would align the Exchange with the rules of NYSE American,
which has the same limitation.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the proposed conforming changes to Rules 6.62P-O(g)
and 6.91P-O(b)(1) to accommodate the addition of single-leg and Complex
Customer Cross Orders would not impose an undue burden on intra-market
or intermarket competition but would instead add clarity, transparency,
and internal consistency to the Exchange's rules.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \29\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\30\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
\30\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
\31\ Id. In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-
regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \32\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\33\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange states that
waiver of the operative delay will provide market participants with an
additional venue for executing two-sided single-leg and complex
Customer orders electronically. In addition, the proposed change to the
definition of ``Customer'' is designed to reflect the Exchange's
intention when it adopted the definition of definition of Professional
Customer in 2014, as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
\33\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed C2C and Complex C2C Orders are substantively identical
to order types adopted by the Exchange's affiliate, NYSE American.\34\
Among other things, the proposed rules protect the priority of
displayed Customer interest on the Exchange by providing that a C2C
Order with one option leg will be rejected if it would trade at the
same price as a displayed Customer order on the Exchange's Consolidated
Book.\35\ In addition, a Complex C2C Order must trade at a price that
is (i) better than the DBB (DBO) if the DBB (DBO) includes displayed
Customer interest on the Exchange, and (ii) better than a resting
Customer Complex Order on the Exchange.\36\ Consistent with the rules
of other options exchanges that offer customer cross orders, the
proposed Customer Cross Orders are limited to Customer orders.\37\ The
proposed change to the definition of Customer is designed to ensure
that the definition reflects the Exchange's intention, as described in
the 2014 Proposal, to treat Professional Customers as Customers, unless
otherwise specified. The proposed conforming changes to Exchange Rules
6.62P-O(g)(1) and 6.91P-O(b)(1) will update the Exchange's rules to
reflect the addition of Customer Cross Orders. The proposal, which does
not raise new or novel regulatory issues, will provide market
participants with an additional venue for crossing single-leg and
complex Customer Cross Orders electronically. Accordingly, the
Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the
proposed rule change operative upon filing.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See NYSE American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2) and note 5, supra.
\35\ See proposed Exchange Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(B)(i).
\36\ See proposed Exchange Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(C).
\37\ See proposed Exchange Rule 6.62P-O(g)(2)(A) and NYSE
American Rule 900.3NYP(g)(2)(A). See also Cboe Rule 5.38(f).
\38\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
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
<bullet> Use the Commission's internet comment form (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>); or
<bullet> Send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9ae8eff6ffb7f9f5f7f7fff4eee9dae9fff9b4fdf5ec"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7002051c155d131f1d1d151e0403300315135e171f06">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
file number SR-NYSEARCA-2024-09 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
<bullet> 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-NYSEARCA-2024-09. 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 (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the
[[Page 9192]]
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-NYSEARCA-
2024-09 and should be submitted on or before March 1, 2024.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-02647 Filed 2-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on February 9, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.