Notice2025-13265

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Introduce a New Credit Under Equity 7, Section 118(a)

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
July 16, 2025

Issuing agencies

Securities and Exchange Commission

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 134 (Wednesday, July 16, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 16, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32036-32038]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-13265]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-103440; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2025-048]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; 
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To 
Introduce a New Credit Under Equity 7, Section 118(a)

July 11, 2025.
    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 July 1, 2025, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or 
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(``SEC'' or ``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 Equity 7, Section 118(a) to 
introduce a new credit.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's 
website at <a href="https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/rulefilings">https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/rulefilings</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 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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's 
schedule of credits, at Equity 7, Section 118(a). Specifically, the 
Exchange proposes to add a new credit of $0.0029 per share executed for 
stocks in all Tapes for a member that, through one or more of its 
Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs: (i) adds displayed liquidity in all 
securities to the Exchange during the month in a volume greater than 
0.50% of Consolidated Volume; \3\ and (ii) has a combined volume 
(adding and removing liquidity) of at least 2.50% of Consolidated 
Volume during the month. The purpose of the new credit is to 
incentivize activity on the Exchange and liquidity adding activity, in 
particular. The Exchange believes that if such incentive is effective, 
then any ensuing increase in liquidity to the Exchange will improve 
market quality, to the benefit of all participants.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Pursuant to Equity 7, Section 118, ``Consolidated Volume'' 
means ``the total consolidated volume reported to all consolidated 
transaction reporting plans by all exchanges and trade reporting 
facilities during a month in equity securities, excluding executed 
orders with a size of less than one round lot.''
    \4\ All references throughout this filing to certain rule 
sections shall pertain to Nasdaq Equity 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 
6(b) of the Act,\5\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in particular, in that it provides 
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges 
among members and issuers and other

[[Page 32037]]

persons using any facility, and is not designed to permit unfair 
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposal Is Reasonable
    The Exchange's proposed change to its schedule of credits ais 
reasonable in several respects. As a threshold matter, the Exchange is 
subject to significant competitive forces in the market for equity 
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' . . . .'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 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.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 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. 
For example, clear substitutes to the Exchange exist in the market for 
equity security transaction services. The Exchange is only one of 
several equity venues to which market participants may direct their 
order flow. Competing equity exchanges offer similar tiered pricing 
structures to that of the Exchange, including schedules of rebates and 
fees that apply based upon members achieving certain volume thresholds.
    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. As such, the 
proposal represents a reasonable attempt by the Exchange to increase 
its liquidity and market share relative to its competitors.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to establish a new 
credit of $0.0029 for shares executed at or above $1.00 for a member 
that (i) adds displayed liquidity in all securities to the Exchange 
during the month in a volume greater than 0.50% of Consolidated Volume; 
and (ii) has a combined volume (adding and removing liquidity) of at 
least 2.50% of Consolidated Volume during the month. This proposal is 
reasonable because it will incentivize activity on the Exchange and 
liquidity adding activity, in particular. The Exchange believes that if 
such incentive is effective, then any ensuing increase in liquidity to 
the Exchange will improve market quality, to the benefit of all 
participants.
The Proposals Are Equitable Allocations of Credits
    The Exchange believes that it is equitable to establish the new 
credit. To the extent that the Exchange succeeds in increasing the 
levels of liquidity and activity on the Exchange, the Exchange will 
experience improvements in its market quality, which stands to benefit 
all market participants.
    Any participant that is dissatisfied with the proposal is free to 
shift its order flow to competing venues that provide more generous 
pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.
The Proposal Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is not unfairly 
discriminatory. As an initial matter, the Exchange believes that 
nothing about its volume-based tiered pricing model is inherently 
unfair; instead, it is a rational pricing model that is well-
established and ubiquitous in today's economy among firms in various 
industries--from co-branded credit cards to grocery stores to cellular 
telephone data plans--that use it to reward the loyalty of their best 
customers that provide high levels of business activity and incent 
other customers to increase the extent of their business activity. It 
is also a pricing model that the Exchange and its competitors have long 
employed with the assent of the Commission. It is fair because it 
enhances price discovery and improves the overall quality of the equity 
markets.
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to adopt the new credit is 
not unfairly discriminatory because the changes are not intended to 
advantage any particular member and will be applied uniformly to all 
members. Moreover, the proposal stands to improve the overall market 
quality of the Exchange, to the benefit of all market participants, by 
incentivizing members to increase the extent of their liquidity adding 
and overall activity on the Exchange.
    Any participant that is dissatisfied with the proposal is free to 
shift its order flow to competing venues that provide more generous 
pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.

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 not necessary or appropriate in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that its proposal will place any 
category of Exchange participant at a competitive disadvantage.
    As noted above, the Exchange's proposal to add a new transaction 
credit is intended to have market-improving effects, to the benefit of 
all members. Any member may elect to achieve the level of liquidity 
required to qualify for the new credit.
    The Exchange notes that its members are free to trade on other 
venues to the extent they believe that the Exchange's fee schedule is 
not attractive. As one can observe by looking at any market share 
chart, price competition between exchanges is fierce, with liquidity 
and market share moving freely between exchanges in reaction to fee and 
credit changes.
Intermarket Competition
    In terms of inter-market competition, 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, or rebate opportunities available at 
other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange 
must continually adjust its credits and fees to remain competitive with 
other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been 
exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to 
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their credit and own 
fees in response, and because market

[[Page 32038]]

participants may readily adjust their order routing practices, the 
Exchange believes that the degree to which credit or fee changes in 
this market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
    The proposed new credit is reflective of this competition because, 
as a threshold issue, even as one of the largest U.S. equities 
exchanges by volume, the Exchange has less than 15% market share, which 
in most markets could hardly be categorized as having enough market 
power to burden competition. Moreover, price competition between 
exchanges is fierce, with liquidity and market share moving freely 
between exchanges in reaction to credit and fee changes. This is an 
addition to free flow of order flow to and among off-exchange venues 
which at times comprises more than half of industry volume.
    The Exchange's proposal to add a new transaction credit is pro-
competitive in that the Exchange intends for the credit to increase 
liquidity addition and overall activity on the Exchange, thereby 
rendering the Exchange more attractive and vibrant to participants.
    In sum, if the change proposed herein is unattractive to market 
participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as 
a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed 
change will impair the ability of members or competing order execution 
venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

    <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#3745425b521a54585a5a525943447744525419505841"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f587809990d8969a9898909b8186b5869096db929a83">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>. Please include 
file number SR-NASDAQ-2025-048 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-NASDAQ-2025-048. 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 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-NASDAQ-2025-048 and should 
be submitted on or before August 6, 2025.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-13265 Filed 7-15-25; 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 July 16, 2025.

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.