Notice2026-05132
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Options 7, Sections 5 and 9B
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
March 17, 2026
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 51 (Tuesday, March 17, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 51 (Tuesday, March 17, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12862-12866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-05132]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-104985; File No. SR-Phlx-2026-08]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Options 7,
Sections 5 and 9B
March 12, 2026.
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 February 27, 2026, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' 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 Options 7, Sections 5 and 9B.
While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated the amendments become operative on March 2,
2026.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at <a href="https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rulefilings">https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rulefilings</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 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
Phlx proposes to modify its Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section
4 to add:
[[Page 12863]]
(1) a surcharge on certain Lead Market Maker \3\ and Market Maker \4\
floor transactions \5\ in multiply-listed Penny and non-Penny Symbols;
and (2) establish a rebate payable to Floor Brokers \6\ for such trades
with a Lead Market Maker or Market Maker order on floor transactions.
Additionally, Phlx proposes to amend Options 7, Section 9B to delete
text related to a migration. Each change will be described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The term ``Floor Lead Market Maker'' is a member who is
registered as an options Lead Market Maker pursuant to Options 2,
Section 12(a) and has a physical presence on the Exchange's Trading
Floor. See Phlx's Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 1(c).
\4\ The term ``Floor Market Maker'' is a Market Maker who is
neither an SQT or an RSQT. A Floor Market Maker may provide a quote
in open outcry. See Phlx's Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section
1(c). The term ``Streaming Quote Trader'' or ``SQT'' is defined in
Options 1, Section 1(b)(54) as a Market Maker who has received
permission from the Exchange to generate and submit option
quotations electronically in options to which such SQT is assigned.
See Phlx's Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 1(c). The term
``Remote Streaming Quote Trader'' or ``RSQT'' is defined in Options
1, Section 1(b)(49) as a Market Maker that is a member affiliated
with an RSQTO with no physical trading floor presence who has
received permission from the Exchange to generate and submit option
quotations electronically in options to which such RSQT has been
assigned. A Remote Streaming Quote Trader Organization or ``RSQTO,''
which may also be referred to as a Remote Market Making Organization
(``RMO''), is a member organization in good standing that satisfies
the RSQTO readiness requirements in Options 2, Section 1(a). See
Phlx's Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 1(c).
\5\ The term ``floor transaction'' is a transaction that is
effected in open outcry on the Exchange's Trading Floor. See Phlx's
Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 1(c).
\6\ The term ``Floor Broker'' means an individual who is
registered with the Exchange for the purpose, while on the Options
Floor, of accepting and handling options orders. See Phlx's Pricing
Schedule at Options 7, Section 1(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Options 7, Section 4
The Exchange proposes to amend Options 7, Section 4, Multiply
Listed Options Fees (Includes options overlying equities, ETFs, ETNs
and indexes which are Multiply Listed) (Excludes SPY). Today, the
Exchange assesses Options Transaction Charges in Multiply Listed
options, including options overlying equities, ETFs, ETNs and indexes
and excluding options in SPY.\7\ The Exchange currently assesses the
following Floor Options Transaction Charges in multiply-listed Penny
and non-Penny Symbols: $0.50 per contract for a Lead Market Maker and
Market Maker, and $0.25 per contract for a Broker-Dealer \8\ and
Firm.\9\ Customers \10\ and Professionals \11\ are not assessed an
Options Transaction Charge in multiply-listed Penny or non-Penny
Symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Transactions in SPY originating on the Exchange floor will
be subject to the Multiply Listed Options Fees (see Multiply Listed
Options Fees in Options 7, Section 4). However, if one side of the
transaction originates on the Exchange floor and any other side of
the trade was the result of an electronically submitted order or a
quote, then these fees will apply to the transactions which
originated on the Exchange floor and contracts that are executed
electronically on all sides of the transaction. The one side of the
transaction which originates on the Exchange floor will count toward
the volume which qualifies a participant for the Simple Order Rebate
for Adding Liquidity for Lead Market Makers and Market Makers in
SPY. See Options 7, Section 3, Part C.
\8\ The term ``Broker-Dealer'' applies to any transaction which
is not subject to any of the other transaction fees applicable
within a particular category. See Phlx's Pricing Schedule at Options
7, Section 1(c).
\9\ The term ``Firm'' applies to any transaction that is
identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the
Firm range at The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC''). See Phlx's
Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 1(c).
\10\ The term ``Customer'' applies to any transaction that is
identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the
Customer range at OCC which is not for the account of a broker or
dealer or for the account of a ``Professional'' (as that term is
defined in Options 1, Section 1(b)(45)). See Phlx's Pricing Schedule
at Options 7, Section 1(c).
\11\ The term ``Professional'' applies to transactions for the
accounts of Professionals, as defined in Options 1, Section 1(b)(45)
means any person or entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in
securities, and (ii) places more than 390 orders in listed options
per day on average during a calendar month for its own beneficial
account(s). See Phlx's Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 1(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes a new note 9 which would assess a surcharge
to Floor Lead Market Makers and Floor Market Makers of $0.20 per
contract on Options Transaction Charges in Penny and non-Penny Symbols
when the Floor Lead Market Maker or Floor Market Maker is the
counterparty to a Customer complex floor transaction executed by a
Floor Broker.\12\ For such a trade, the Exchange proposes to pay the
Floor Broker side of the trade a $0.20 per contract rebate. The
aforementioned pricing will not apply to index options \13\ and singly
listed options \14\ in Options 7, Section 5, strategy transactions
(dividend, merger, short stock interest, reversal and conversion, jelly
roll and box spread strategies),\15\ Floor Qualified Contingent Cross
Orders \16\ or Customer Cross Orders.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Today, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'') assesses a $0.12 per
contract surcharge to any Market Maker order on the trading floor
that is a counterparty to a complex Manual trade executed by a Floor
Broker, and the Floor Broker side of the such trade is eligible of a
rebate of $0.20. See NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges.
Additionally, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'') assesses a $0.12
surcharge 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). See NYSE American Options Fee Schedule.
\13\ Index Options are subject to pricing within Options 7,
Section 5A, and B. Today, Options Transaction Charges in non-Penny
Options exclude NDX, NDXP and XND.
\14\ Singly Listed Options are subject to pricing within Options
7, Section 5C.
\15\ Strategy transactions include dividend, merger, short stock
interest, reversal and conversion, jelly roll and box spread
strategies as described within Options 7, Section 4.
\16\ Floor Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') Orders, as
described within Options 8, Section 30(e), are subject to pricing
noted within Options 7, Section 4. Floor QCC Orders do not qualify
as floor transactions as they are not executed in open outcry.
\17\ Customer Cross Orders, as described within Options 8,
Section 30(f) are subject to pricing noted within Options 7, Section
4. Customer Cross Orders do not qualify as floor transactions as
they are not executed in open outcry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the proposed surcharge would increase certain complex fees
for Floor Lead Market Makers and Floor Market Makers for open outcry
transactions, the Exchange believes these participants will continue to
quote actively to participate in floor transactions 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 Lead Market Maker or Floor
Market Maker.
Options 7, Section 9
In 2025, Phlx underwent a technology migration \18\ wherein member
organizations maintained both legacy FIX Ports that were connected to
the legacy Phlx platform and new FIX Ports that were connected to the
new Phlx platform that was introduced as part of the migration. The
migration was completed in December 2025 and legacy FIX Ports were
sunset on February 27, 2026. The Exchange proposes to remove the
obsolete rule text that states, ``Phlx will sunset legacy FIX Ports on
February 27, 2026. The below FIX Port Fees apply to new and legacy FIX
Ports.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See <a href="https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/MicroNews.aspx?id=OTU2025-6">https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/MicroNews.aspx?id=OTU2025-6</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\19\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\20\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their
preference for competition over regulatory
[[Page 12864]]
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.'' \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005),
70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Likewise, in NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission
\22\ (``NetCoalition'') the D.C. Circuit upheld the Commission's use of
a market-based approach in evaluating the fairness of market data fees
against a challenge claiming that Congress mandated a cost-based
approach.\23\ As the court emphasized, the Commission ``intended in
Regulation NMS that `market forces, rather than regulatory
requirements' play a role in determining the market data . . . to be
made available to investors and at what cost.'' \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
\23\ See NetCoalition, at 534-535.
\24\ Id. at 537.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, ``[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'. . . . '' \25\ Although the court and
the SEC were discussing the cash equities markets, the Exchange
believes that these views apply with equal force to the options
markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Id. at 539 (quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008)
(SR-NYSEArca-2006-21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Options 7, Section 4
The Proposal is Reasonable
The Exchange's proposal to assess a surcharge to Floor Lead Market
Makers and Floor Market Makers of $0.20 per contract on Options
Transaction Charges in multiply-listed Penny or non-Penny Symbols when
the Floor Lead Market Maker or Floor Market Maker is the counterparty
to a Customer complex floor transaction executed by a Floor Broker in
open outcry is reasonable. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rebate of $0.20 per contract to be paid to Floor Brokers would
incentivize Floor Brokers to direct additional Customer complex floor
transactions to the Exchange, thereby creating more trading
opportunities on the trading floor for all market participants,
including Floor Lead Market Makers and Floor Market Makers. The
Exchange thus believes that, despite the proposed surcharge on Floor
Lead Market Makers and Floor Market Makers, Customer floor transactions
that are counterparty to such Floor Broker orders, 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 open outcry complex 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.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 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 Lead Market
Makers and Floor Market Makers on the trading floor. To the extent this
purpose is achieved, the Exchange believes that the proposed surcharge
would not disincentivize market making 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.
The Proposal is Equitable
The Exchange believes it is equitable to apply the rebate only to
Floor Brokers and not to Floor Lead Market Makers and Floor Market
Makers. Floor Lead Market Makers and Floor Market Makers only represent
their own interest on the trading floor and therefore do not need a
similar incentive. Unlike Floor Lead Market Makers and Floor Market
Makers, Floor Brokers act as agents in representing orders on the
Exchange's trading floor. Participants who desire to have a Customer
order executed on Phlx's trading floor would provide that order to a
Floor Broker to be represented. Floor Lead Market Makers and Floor
Market Makers may interact with orders represented by the Floor Broker
in open outcry on the trading floor. Finally, Floor Lead Market Makers
and Floor Market Makers may choose to conduct their business on a
trading floor or in an electronic market, unlike Floor Brokers, who
have a business model that is naturally tied to the physical trading
space.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is equitable because
the proposed rebate is based on the amount and type of business
transacted on the Exchange, and Floor Brokers may elect to earn the
proposed rebate if they choose. 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 equitable because
it is intended to support Floor Brokers' role in facilitating the
execution of open outcry 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 open outcry transactions to the
[[Page 12865]]
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 Exchange
also notes that the proposed rebate is similar in structure to an
incentive program for Floor Brokers offered by NYSE Arca and NYSE
American.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Proposal Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to impose a
surcharge on Floor Lead Market Maker and Floor Market Maker orders on
the trading floor that are a counterparty to a Customer complex floor
transaction executed by a Floor Broker because the proposed change
would apply to all Floor Lead Market Maker and 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 Customer complex floor transactions that
trade with a Floor Lead Market Maker or Floor Market Maker 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 Floor Lead Market Maker or Floor Market Maker
orders that trade with Floor Broker Customer complex floor
transactions, the Exchange believes that Floor Lead Market Makers and
Floor 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.
The Exchange's proposal to exclude index options, singly listed
options, strategy transactions, Floor Qualified Contingent Cross Orders
and Customer Cross Orders is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory. The Exchange notes that index options and singly listed
options have their own separate pricing in Options 7, Section 5. These
types of options are not multi-list options. The Exchange notes that
strategy transactions are not assessed Options Transactions Charges in
Options 7, Section 4 for Penny and Non-Penny Symbols and have their own
pricing model. Floor Qualified Contingent Cross Orders and Customer
Cross Orders are not transacted in open outcry. The Exchange would
apply the exclusions to note 9 in a uniform manner to all Phlx member
organizations.
Options 7, Section 9B
The Exchange's proposal to remove rule text in Options 7, Section
9B related to a prior migration is reasonable because the migration is
complete and the Exchange has sunset all FIX legacy ports as of
February 27, 2026. Further, the proposal is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because no Phlx member organization has access to a FIX
legacy port.
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.
Inter-market Competition
The proposal does not impose an undue burden on inter-market
competition. The Exchange believes its proposal remains competitive
with other options markets and will offer market participants with
another choice of where to transact options. 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 fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which
fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited.
Options 7, Section 4
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 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.
Intra-market 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
[[Page 12866]]
of individual stocks for all types of orders, large and small.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 8, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed change is designed to attract additional order flow to
the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed surcharge on
Floor Lead Market Maker and Floor Market Maker orders on the trading
floor that are a counterparty to open outcry Customer complex floor
transactions executed by a Floor Broker, and the proposed rebate
payable to the Floor Broker side of such trades would encourage Floor
Broker open outcry order flow and would not disincentivize Floor Lead
Market Maker and Floor Market Maker activity on the trading floor.
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
open outcry on the trading floor, and, accordingly, the proposed
changes would not impose a disparate burden on competition among market
participants on the Exchange.
Finally, the Exchange would apply the exclusions to note 9 in a
uniform manner to all Phlx member organizations.
Options 7, Section 9B
The Exchange's proposal to remove rule text in Options 7, Section
9B related to a prior migration does not impose an undue burden on
competition because no Phlx member organization has access to a FIX
legacy port.
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.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 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#86f4f3eae3abe5e9ebebe3e8f2f5c6f5e3e5a8e1e9f0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c4b6b1a8a1e9a7aba9a9a1aab0b784b7a1a7eaa3abb2">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
file number SR-Phlx-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-Phlx-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-Phlx-2026-08 and
should be submitted on or before April 7, 2026.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2026-05132 Filed 3-16-26; 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 March 17, 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.