Notice2026-02226
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 To Modify Certain Fees and Rebates Applicable to Specialists, e-Specialists and NYSE American Options Market Makers and Floor Brokers
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 4, 2026
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 23 (Wednesday, February 4, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 23 (Wednesday, February 4, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5122-5125]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-02226]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-104752; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2026-08]
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 To Modify Certain Fees and
Rebates Applicable to Specialists, e-Specialists and NYSE American
Options Market Makers and Floor Brokers
January 30, 2026.
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 28, 2026, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 the NYSE American Options Fee
Schedule (``Fee Schedule'') regarding fees and rebates applicable to
Specialists, e-Specialists and NYSE American Options Market Makers
(``Market Makers'') and Floor Brokers. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at <a href="http://www.nyse.com">www.nyse.com</a> and at the
principal office of the Exchange.
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 is to amend the Fee Schedule to modify
fees and rebates applicable to Specialists, e-Specialists and Market
Makers (collectively, ``Floor Market Makers'') and Floor Brokers.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to (1) extend a current surcharge
that applies to certain complex orders to any Floor Market Maker order
that is a counterparty to a Manual trade executed by a Floor Broker
that is not a Simple Order, and (2) establish a rebate payable to Floor
Brokers for such trades with a Floor Market Maker order. The Exchange
proposes the fee change to be effective January 28, 2026.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Exchange previously filed to amend the Fee Schedule on
January 2, 2026 (SR-NYSEAMER-2026-01), then withdrew such filing and
amended the Fee Schedule on January 16, 2026 (SR-NYSEAMER-2026-04),
which latter filing the Exchange withdrew on January 28, 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange currently charges a surcharge of $0.12 per contract
that is applied to any electronic Non-Customer Complex Order that
executes against a Customer Complex Order (the ``Non-Customer Complex
Surcharge''), regardless of whether the execution occurs in a Complex
Order Auction but does not apply to executions in CUBE Auctions. For
ATP Holders that achieve a prescribed volume threshold during a billing
month, the Non-Customer Complex Surcharge is reduced to ($0.10). The
Non-Customer Complex Surcharge is consistent with surcharges imposed by
other options exchanges.\5\ The Non-Customer Complex Surcharge is
described in footnote 5 in Section I.A. of the Fee Schedule.\6\ The
Exchange proposes extending the current surcharge of $0.12 per contract
to any Floor Market Maker order that is a counterparty to a Manual
trade executed by a Floor Broker that is not a Simple Order,\7\ and to
establish a rebate of $0.20 per contract payable to the Floor Broker
side of such trades. For Floor Brokers that participate in the FB
Prepay
[[Page 5123]]
Program, the proposed rebate would apply in lieu of any rebates earned
through the Manual Billable Rebate Program as provided in Section III.
E. of the Fee Schedule. Although the proposed change would increase the
fee for Manual transactions that are not Simple Orders (``non-Simple
Manual orders'') for Floor Market Makers, the Exchange believes these
participants will continue to quote actively to participate in
transactions on the Trading Floor as they do today, thereby promoting
trading opportunities and competition on the Trading Floor to the
benefit of all market participants. The Exchange also believes that the
proposed rebate would continue to incentivize Floor Brokers to
participate on the Trading Floor, including when the counterparty to
such trading is a Floor Market Maker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See, e.g., NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule, ELECTRONINC
COMPLEX ORDER EXECUTION (TRANSACTION FEE--PER CONTRACT), footnote *
(assessing $0.12 per contract surcharge to any electronic Non-
Customer Complex Order that executes against a Customer Complex
Order); MIAX Options Fee Schedule, Sections 1)a)i)-ii) (assessing a
$0.12 per contract surcharge for trading against a Priority Customer
Complex Order for Penny and Non-Penny classes).
\6\ See Fee Schedule, Section I.A. (Rates for Options
transactions).
\7\ A ``Simple Order'' is any order to purchase or sell
contracts in a single listed option series. See Fee Schedule, KEY
TERMS and DEFINITIONS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To reflect the changes proposed herein, the Exchange proposes to
add the following new rule text in footnote 5 in Section I.A. of the
Fee Schedule: ``The surcharge will also be applied to any Floor Market
Maker order that is a counterparty to a Manual trade executed by a
Floor Broker that is not a Simple Order, and the Floor Broker side of
such trade will be eligible for a rebate of ($0.20). For Participants
in the FB Prepay Program, the rebate will apply in lieu of any rebates
achieved via the Manual Billable Rebate Program described below in
Section III.E.'' Finally, the Exchange proposes a non-substantive,
clarifying change to add the words ``for Electronic executions'' in the
third sentence of footnote 5 to specify that the discount would not
apply to Manual Complex Orders.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\9\ in particular,
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Proposed Rule Change Is Reasonable
The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, 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.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (``Reg NMS
Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are currently 18 registered options exchanges competing for
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding
index-based options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market
share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options
trades.\11\ Therefore, currently no exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity and ETF
options order flow. More specifically, in November 2025, the Exchange
had 8.58% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and
ETF options trades.\12\ In such a low-concentrated and highly
competitive market, no single options exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of options order flow. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety
of formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange,
available here: <a href="https://www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics">https://www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics</a>.
\12\ Based on a compilation of OCC data for monthly volume of
equity-based options and monthly volume of equity-based ETF options,
see id., the Exchange's market share in equity-based options
increased from 6.09% for the month of November 2024 to 8.58% for the
month of November 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain options exchange transaction fees.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rebate would incentivize
Floor Brokers to direct additional non-Simple Manual orders to the
Exchange, thereby creating more trading opportunities on the Trading
Floor for all market participants, including Market Makers. The
Exchange thus believes that, despite the proposed surcharge on Market
Maker orders that are counterparty to such Floor Broker orders, Market
Makers would not be discouraged from continuing to quote and trade
actively on the Exchange.
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes are reasonably
designed to incent Floor Brokers (and other participants on the Trading
Floor) to increase the number of Manual orders sent to the Exchange.
Any increase in trading volume would create more trading opportunities
for all market participants and would in turn attract additional order
flow to the Exchange, further contributing to a deeper, more liquid
market to the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange also
notes that the proposed rebate is similar in structure to incentive
programs for Floor Brokers offered by competing options exchanges.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See, e.g., BOX Exchange Fee Schedule, Section V. Manual
Transaction Fees, available at <a href="https://boxexchange.com/assets/BOX-Fee-Schedule-as-of-January-22-2026.pdf">https://boxexchange.com/assets/BOX-Fee-Schedule-as-of-January-22-2026.pdf</a> (offering Floor Brokers that
submit QOO and FOO Orders a $0.20 per contract enhanced rebate for
executions that trade with a Floor Market Maker, in lieu of lesser
per contract rebates also available to Floor Brokers); MIAX Sapphire
Options Exchange, Section 1) c) Trading Floor Transactions,
available at <a href="https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/fee_schedule-files/MIAX_Sapphire_Fee_Schedule_01212026_b.pdf">https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/fee_schedule-files/MIAX_Sapphire_Fee_Schedule_01212026_b.pdf</a>
(providing for the ``Floor Broker Breakup Credit,'' a $0.20 credit
applicable to Floor Brokers that submit a QFO or cQFO for executions
that trade with a Floor Market Maker, instead of the $0.10 Floor
Broker rebate otherwise available).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange further believes the surcharge is reasonable because
it is designed to offset costs associated with the proposed rebate
payable to Floor Brokers when they interact with Floor Market Makers.
To the extent this purpose is achieved, the Exchange believes that the
proposed surcharge would not disincentivize Market Maker activity on
the Trading Floor because increased order flow from Floor Brokers
seeking to earn the proposed rebate would result in more opportunities
to trade for all market participants.
To the extent the proposed rule change continues to attract greater
volume and liquidity by encouraging Floor Brokers to increase their
options volume on the Exchange in an effort to earn the proposed
rebate, the Exchange believes the proposed changes would improve the
Exchange's overall competitiveness and strengthen its market quality
for all market participants. Against the backdrop of the competitive
environment in which the Exchange operates, the proposed rule change is
a reasonable attempt by the Exchange to increase the depth of its
market and improve its market share relative to its competitors.
[[Page 5124]]
The Proposed Rule Change Is an Equitable Allocation of Credits and Fees
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is an equitable
allocation of its fees and credits because the proposed rebate is based
on the amount and type of business transacted on the Exchange, and
Floor Brokers can try to earn the proposed rebate, or not. The Exchange
also believes that the proposed surcharge is equitable because it is
designed to balance costs associated with encouraging increased
execution opportunities on the Trading Floor, and an increase in such
orders would in turn enhance trading opportunities for all market
participants. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rebate to
Floor Brokers is an equitable allocation of fees and credits because it
is intended to support Floor Brokers' role in facilitating the
execution of Manual orders, which function benefits all market
participants on the Trading Floor.
Moreover, the proposal is designed to incent participation on the
Trading Floor in an effort to make the Exchange a primary execution
venue and to attract more Manual transactions to the Exchange. To the
extent that the proposed change attracts more Floor Broker orders to
the Exchange, this increased order flow would continue to make the
Exchange a more competitive venue for, among other things, order
execution. Thus, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change would
improve market quality for all market participants on the Exchange and,
as a consequence, attract more order flow to the Exchange thereby
improving market-wide quality and price discovery.
The Proposed Rule Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to impose a
surcharge on Floor Market Maker orders that are a counterparty to a
Floor Broker non-Simple Manual order because the proposed change would
apply to all Floor Market Maker orders equally, and as discussed above,
the Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to incent order
flow to the Exchange, which would enhance liquidity on the Exchange to
the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange also believes that
the proposed rebate payable to Floor Brokers for a non-Simple Manual
order that trades with a Floor Market Maker order is not unfairly
discriminatory because it would be available to all similarly-situated
market participants on an equal and non-discriminatory basis. The
Exchange further believes that the proposed rebate available to Floor
Brokers is not unfairly discriminatory to other market participants
because it is intended to encourage the role performed by Floor Brokers
in facilitating the execution of orders via open outcry, a function
which the Exchange wishes to support for the benefit of all market
participants. In addition, although the proposed change would apply a
surcharge to Market Maker orders that trade with Floor Broker non-
Simple Manual orders, the Exchange believes that Market Makers would
not be discouraged from continuing to participate actively on the
Trading Floor and would benefit from increased Floor Broker order flow
as a result of the proposed change. To the extent that this increased
order flow attracts order flow from other market participants to the
Trading Floor, the proposed rule change would improve market quality
and promote additional trading opportunities for all market
participants on the Exchange.
Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for all market participants. As a result, the Exchange believes that
the proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting
Regulation NMS of fostering integrated competition among orders, which
promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of
orders, large and small.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 10, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is designed to attract
additional order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the
proposed surcharge on Floor Market Maker orders that are a counterparty
to Floor Broker non-Simple Manual orders, and the proposed rebate
payable to the Floor Broker side of such trades would encourage Floor
Broker non-Simple Manual order flow and would not disincentivize Floor
Market Maker activity. Greater liquidity benefits all market
participants on the Exchange and increased order flow would increase
opportunities for execution of other trading interest. The proposed
modifications would apply and be available to all similarly-situated
market participants that execute Manual transactions on the Trading
Floor, and, accordingly, the proposed changes would not impose a
disparate burden on competition among market participants on the
Exchange.
Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor one
of the other 17 competing options exchanges if they deem the Exchange's
fee levels to be excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges
and to attract order flow to the Exchange. Based on publicly-available
information, and excluding index-based options, no single exchange has
more than 16% of the market share of executed volume of multiply-listed
equity and ETF options trades.\15\ Therefore, currently no exchange
possesses significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed
equity and ETF options order flow. More specifically, in November 2025,
the Exchange had 8.58% market share of executed volume of multiply-
listed equity and ETF options trades.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety
of formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange,
available here: <a href="https://www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics">https://www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics</a>.
\16\ Based on a compilation of OCC data for monthly volume of
equity-based options and monthly volume of equity-based ETF options,
see id., the Exchange's market share in equity-based options
increased from 6.09% for the month of November 2024 to 8.58% for the
month of November 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment because it modifies the Exchange's fees in a
manner designed to continue to incent participants on the Trading Floor
to direct trading interest to the Exchange, to provide liquidity and to
attract additional order flow. To the extent that Floor Brokers are
encouraged to utilize the Exchange as a primary trading venue for all
transactions, all Exchange market participants stand to benefit from
the improved market quality and increased opportunities for price
improvement. The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such an
[[Page 5125]]
environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and credits to remain competitive with other
exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.
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 foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \17\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \18\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \19\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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#dba9aeb7bef6b8b4b6b6beb5afa89ba8beb8f5bcb4ad"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="394b4c555c145a5654545c574d4a794a5c5a175e564f">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
file number SR-NYSEAMER-2026-08 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-NYSEAMER-2026-08. 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 filing 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-NYSEAMER-2026-08 and should be submitted
on or before February 25, 2026.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2026-02226 Filed 2-3-26; 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 4, 2026.
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.