Notice2026-18003
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule Regarding Fees and Rebates Applicable to Manual Transactions
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
September 3, 2026
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 170 (Thursday, September 3, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 170 (Thursday, September 3, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56686-56690]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-18003]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-106244; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2026-87]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify the
NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule Regarding Fees and Rebates Applicable to
Manual Transactions
August 31, 2026.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934
[[Page 56687]]
(``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given that
on August 18, 2026, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' 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 Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule'') regarding fees and rebates applicable to Manual
transactions. 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 Manual transactions. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to (1) amend fees applicable to Manual transactions
in non-Penny issues executed by LMMs and Market Makers (collectively,
``Market Makers''), and (2) establish a rebate payable to Floor Broker
orders that trade with a Market Maker order on the Trading Floor
(``Trading Floor'' or ``Floor''). The Exchange proposes the fee change
to be effective August 18 2026.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Exchange previously filed to amend the Fee Schedule
several times beginning on January 2, 2026, all of which filings
were withdrawn and replaced by another filing. Most recently, the
Exchange amended the Fee Schedule on June 22, 2026 (SR-NYSEARCA-
2026-70) which filing the Exchange withdrew on June 22, 2026. The
Exchange notes that a previous filing proposed changes to a complex
order surcharge that are not included in this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Fee Schedule sets forth per contract transaction fees
applicable to Manual executions.\5\ Currently, a $0.50 per contract fee
applies to Market Makers' Manual transactions in both Penny and non-
Penny issues (except for Manual transactions in MXEA, MXEF, MXUSA,
MXWLD, and MXACW). The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to
increase this fee to $0.90 per contract for Market Makers' Manual
transactions in non-Penny issues (excluding transactions in MXEA, MXEF,
MXUSA, MXWLD, and MXACW).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See NYSE Arca OPTIONS: TRADE-RELATED CHARGES FOR STANDARD
OPTIONS, TRANSACTION FEE FOR MANUAL EXECUTIONS--PER CONTRACT.
\6\ The Exchange also proposes a formatting change to the table
setting forth Manual transaction fees to delineate fees applicable
to executions in Penny vs. non-Penny issues. The Exchange is not
proposing to amend any fees other than those applicable to Market
Maker Manual transactions in non-Penny issues as described above.
The Exchange also proposes a clarifying change in the text defining
Penny and non-Penny issues (preceding the table setting forth Manual
transaction fees), to specify that a Penny issue or class refers to
option classes that participate in the Penny Interval Program, as
described in Rules 6.72-O and 6.72A-O.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also proposes to establish a rebate of $0.20 per
contract payable to Floor Broker orders that trade with Market Maker
orders on the Trading Floor. For Floor Brokers that participate in the
FB Prepay Program,\7\ the proposed rebate would apply in lieu of any
rebates earned through the Manual Billable Rebate Program as provided
in the Fee Schedule. The Exchange proposes to add new text describing
this rebate to Endnote 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The Exchange also proposes a non-substantive change to
correct a typo in the portion of the Fee Schedule describing the FB
Prepay Program. See proposed Fee Schedule, FLOOR BROKER FIXED COST
PREPAYMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM (the ``FB Prepay Program'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed rebate for Penny and non-
Penny issues would continue to incentivize Floor Brokers to participate
on the Trading Floor, including when the counterparty to such trading
is a Market Maker. In addition, although the proposed change to the
Market Maker fee for Manual transactions in non-Penny issues, which in
July 2026 only made up 27% of all manual transactions would, increase
the fee for such executions, the Exchange believes the proposed change,
taken together with the proposed Floor Broker rebate would, on balance,
not discourage Market Makers from continuing to participate in
transactions on the Trading Floor, thereby promoting trading
opportunities and competition on the Floor to the benefit of all market
participants. The Exchange also notes that the amount of the proposed
fee for Market Maker Manual transactions in non-Penny issues is within
the range of fees currently in place for transactions by Market Makers
(and other market participants) in non-Penny issues.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., Fee Schedule, TRANSACTION FEE FOR ELECTRONIC
EXECUTIONS--PER CONTRACT (providing for $1.20 take fee for Market
Maker electronic executions in non-Penny issues and $1.10 take fee
for Professional Customer electronic executions in non-Penny
issues).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the proposed fee is comparable to fees imposed by
other options exchanges on responders in transactions that are
analogous to the transactions that are at issue here. For example, for
cross order handling under its Automated Improvement Mechanism
(``AIM'') program, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') imposes a $1.05 per
contract fee on Clearing Trading Permit Holders responding to orders in
AIM's crossing-mechanism, while charging Cboe Market Makers a fee of
$0.25 per contract, a differential of $0.80 per contract, for
essentially the same activity.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Cboe Exchange Fee Schedule, Rate Table--Options
Transaction Fees, available at <a href="https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/Cboe_FeeSchedule.pdf">https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/Cboe_FeeSchedule.pdf</a>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\10\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\11\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\11\ 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
[[Page 56688]]
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 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.\13\ Therefore, currently no exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity and ETF
options order flow. More specifically, in July 2026, the Exchange had
10.01% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and
ETF options trades.\14\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 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>.
\14\ 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
decreased from 11.95% for the month of July 2025 to 10.01% for the
month of July 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 is reasonable
because it would incentivize Floor Brokers to direct additional Manual
orders to the Exchange, thereby creating more trading opportunities on
the Trading Floor for all market participants, including Market Makers,
who, therefore, would not be discouraged from continuing to quote and
trade actively on the Exchange. The Exchange also believes that, in
addition to benefitting all market participants, the amount of the
proposed fee for Market Maker Manual transactions in non-Penny issues
is reasonable, as it is (i) targeted in that it is limited to manual
transactions in non-Penny issues, which make up only 14% of all manual
transactions; (ii) consistent with fees charged, and differences
allowed, by other options exchanges on similarly situated participants
for similar transactions (e.g., Cboe AIM transaction fees); (iii)
remains within the range of fees set forth in the Fee Schedule for
transactions by Market Makers in non-Penny issues; and (iv) more
closely aligns with the fee applicable to electronic transactions by
Market Makers in non-Penny issues.
Furthermore, the Exchange believes that assessing a higher fee for
manual transactions on the Trading Floor is reasonable considering the
distinct advantages afforded to Floor-based Market Makers. In July
2026, approximately 98% of Market Maker Manual volume in non-Penny
issues was generated by Floor-based Market Makers who, by virtue of
their physical presence and participation model, are uniquely
positioned to evaluate the full terms of a transaction, including size,
pricing, and counterparty interest, immediately prior to execution.
This capability enables Floor-based Market Makers to exercise
discretion in determining whether to engage in a trade under informed
conditions that are not available to off-floor or fully electronic
participants. In addition, the Exchange's rules provide Floor-based
Market Makers with a guaranteed participation entitlement of up to 60%
of the trade for Facilitation Cross Transactions,\15\ even in the
absence of price improvement. This allocation represents a meaningful
structural advantage as it ensures a substantial share of order flow
once a Floor-based Market Maker elects to participate.\16\ Together,
these features--the ability to assess trading opportunities in real
time before committing capital and the certainty of receiving a
guaranteed, significant allocation--enhance the likelihood of favorable
execution outcomes and revenue opportunities for Floor-based Market
Makers. Accordingly, the Exchange believes it is reasonable to assess
higher fees on Floor-based Market Maker Manual transactions in non-
Penny issues. The differential between the fee charged by the Exchange
to Floor-based Market Makers versus the fee charged to other
participants in non-Penny issues, similar to the differential in fees
Cboe charges to Clearing Trading Permit Holders versus to Market Makers
in their AIM transactions, reflects the enhanced trading privileges,
informational advantages, and allocation guarantees that are uniquely
available to Trading Floor-based participants and serves to
appropriately align fees with the relative value of these benefits as
compared to other market participants operating without such
advantages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Rule 6.47-O.
\16\ This is a significant benefit. While some Market Maker
Manual volume derives from upstairs paired transactions, where these
benefits are not present, such activity constitutes only a small
percentage of overall Market Maker Manual activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 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 proposed change is reasonable
because it is designed to offset costs associated with the proposed
Floor Broker rebate, which, as noted above, is being proposed to create
more trading opportunities on the Trading Floor for all market
participants, including Market Makers. To the extent this purpose is
achieved, the Exchange believes that the proposed change 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. In addition, the Exchange notes that market participants
are free to conduct transactions on competing venues instead if they
believe other markets offer more favorable fees and credits.
To the extent the proposed rule change continues to attract greater
volume and liquidity by encouraging Floor Brokers to increase their
options
[[Page 56689]]
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 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 change to the fee applicable to Market
Maker Manual transactions in non-Penny issues is equitable because it
is narrowly designed to balance costs associated with encouraging
increased execution opportunities in manual transactions on the Trading
Floor, and an increase in such orders would in turn enhance trading
opportunities for all market participants. In addition, the proposed
fee is consistent with fees charged, and differences allowed, by Cboe
for analogous transactions (e.g., AIM transaction fees) and is within
the range of fees currently applicable to electronic transactions by
Market Makers and other market participants in non-Penny issues. The
Exchange further believes that assessing Market Makers a higher fee for
Manual transactions in non-Penny issues is equitable because Floor-
based Market Makers, who account for the majority of such volume,
occupy a uniquely advantaged position relative to other market
participants. Specifically, they benefit from the exclusive ability to
evaluate the terms of a transaction immediately prior to execution as
well as a guaranteed participation allocation of up to 60% of the trade
under the Exchange's rules.\18\ 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, including Market Makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See note 15, supra..
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 modify
the fee applicable to Market Maker Manual transactions in non-Penny
issues because the proposed change would apply to all similarly-
situated 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 Manual order that
trades with a Market Maker order on the Trading Floor 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 increase
the fee applicable to Market Maker Manual transactions in non-Penny
issues, the Exchange notes that the amount of the proposed fee is
consistent with fees charged, and differences allowed, by Cboe for
analogous transactions (e.g., AIM transaction fees) and is within the
range of fees currently applicable to electronic and is within the
range of fees currently applicable to transactions by Market Makers and
other market participants in non-Penny issues.
The Exchange and believes that Market Makers would not be
discouraged from continuing to participate actively on the Trading
Floor and would benefit from increased Manual order flow, including
from Floor Brokers seeking to earn the proposed rebate. The Exchange
also believes that the higher fee assessed to Market Makers for Manual
transactions in non-Penny issues is not unfairly discriminatory because
it reasonably reflects the uniquely advantaged position of Trading
Floor-based Market Makers, who generate a significant portion of such
volume, relative to other market participants. In particular, these
Trading Floor-based Market Makers possess the exclusive ability to
evaluate the full terms of a transaction immediately prior to execution
and benefit from a guaranteed participation allocation of up to 60% of
the trade under the Exchange's rules.\19\ These features provide Floor-
based Market Makers with meaningful informational and allocation
advantages that are not available to off-floor or purely electronic
participants. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the differential
in fees, which is similar to the differential Cboe charges Clearing
Trading Permit Holders and Market Makers in their AIM transactions, is
appropriately calibrated to the distinct structural benefits available
to Trading Floor-based Market Makers and therefore does not constitute
unfair discrimination. Rather, the higher fee reflects a rational
alignment between pricing and the value of the enhanced trading
opportunities and execution certainty afforded to these participants.
Moreover, to the extent that the exercise of these advantages
contributes to increased Trading Floor activity and attracts additional
order flow, the proposed fee would enhance overall market quality,
deepen liquidity, and promote additional trading opportunities for all
market participants on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See note 15, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 56690]]
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.'' \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, note 12 supra at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is designed to attract
additional order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the
proposed change to Market Maker fees for Manual transactions in non-
Penny issues, and the proposed rebate payable to the Floor Broker
orders that trade against Market Maker orders on the Trading Floor
would encourage Floor Broker Manual order flow and, therefore, would
not disincentivize 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 changes 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 18 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.\21\ Therefore, currently no exchange
possesses significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed
equity and ETF options order flow. More specifically, in July 2026, the
Exchange had 10.01% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed
equity and ETF options trades.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 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>.
\22\ 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 11.66% for the month of May 2025 to 10.64% for the
month of May 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
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) \23\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \24\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\24\ 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) \25\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 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#255750494008464a4848404b5156655640460b424a53"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3240475e571f515d5f5f575c4641724157511c555d44">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
file number SR-NYSEARCA-2026-87 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-2026-87. 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-NYSEARCA-2026-87 and should be submitted
on or before September 24, 2026.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2026-18003 Filed 9-2-26; 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 September 3, 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.