[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 182 (Friday, September 18, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58415-58418]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-20568]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89860; File No. SR-BX-2020-025]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing 
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the 
Exchange's Transaction Fees, at Equity 7, Section 118(a)

September 14, 2020.
    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 September 1, 2020, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX'' 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.

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

[[Page 58416]]

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance 
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's transaction fees, at 
Equity 7, Section 118(a), as described further below. The text of the 
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/bx/rules, at the principal office of 
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements 
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and 
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The 
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in 
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in 
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such 
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange operates on the ``taker-maker'' model, whereby it 
generally pays credits to members that take liquidity and charges fees 
to members that provide liquidity. Currently, the Exchange has a 
schedule, at Equity 7, Section 118(a), which consists of several 
different credits that it provides for orders in securities priced at 
$1 or more per share that access liquidity on the Exchange and several 
different charges that it assesses for orders in such securities that 
add liquidity on the Exchange.
Description of the Changes
    The Exchange proposes to revise its schedule of charges to add one 
new fee. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to charge a $0.0022 per 
share executed fee for displayed orders that add liquidity entered by a 
member that: (i) Adds liquidity equal to or exceeding 0.12% of total 
Consolidated Volume during a month; and (ii) adds at least 35% more 
liquidity, as a percentage of total Consolidated Volume during a month, 
than it did during August 2020. The proposed fee represents a discount 
relative to the standard $0.0030 per share executed charge for orders 
that provide liquidity to the Exchange, as well as a discount relative 
to the $0.0024-$0.0028 per share executed range of existing charges for 
displayed orders that add liquidity above certain threshold percentages 
of total Consolidated during a month. Accordingly, the Exchange 
believes that the proposed new fee will incentivize members to grow 
their existing level of liquidity adding activity on the Exchange, and 
in particular, to grow such levels relative to a baseline of such 
activity. In doing so, the Exchange intends to improve the overall 
quality and attractiveness of the Nasdaq BX market.
Impact of the Changes
    Those participants that act as net adders of liquidity from the 
Exchange will benefit directly from the proposed fee. Other 
participants will also benefit from the new fee insofar as any ensuing 
increase in liquidity adding activity will improve the overall quality 
of the market.
    The Exchange notes that its proposal is not otherwise targeted at 
or expected to be limited in its applicability to a specific segment(s) 
of market participants nor will it apply differently to different types 
of market participants.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 
6(b) of the Act,\3\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\4\ 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. The proposal is also consistent with 
Section 11A of the Act relating to the establishment of the national 
market system for securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposal Is Reasonable
    The Exchange's proposed change to its schedule of charge is 
reasonable in several respects. As a threshold matter, the Exchange is 
subject to significant competitive forces in the market for equity 
securities transaction services that constrain its pricing 
determinations in that market. The fact that this market is competitive 
has long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities 
and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one 
disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC 
explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of 
securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-routing 
agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders for 
execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share 
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly, 
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker 
dealers'. . . .'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010) 
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2, 
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their 
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining 
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation 
NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market 
model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in 
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current 
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in 
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most 
important to investors and listed companies.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70 
FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting 
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Numerous indicia demonstrate the competitive nature of this market. 
For example, clear substitutes to the Exchange exist in the market for 
equity security transaction services. The Exchange is only one of 
several equity venues to which market participants may direct their 
order flow, and it represents a small percentage of the overall market. 
It is also only one of several taker-maker exchanges. Competing equity 
exchanges offer similar tiered pricing structures to that of the 
Exchange, including schedules of rebates and fees that apply based upon 
members achieving certain volume thresholds.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See CBOE EDGA Fee Schedule, at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edga/; NYSE National Fee Schedule, 
at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/regulation/nyse/NYSE_National_Schedule_of_Fees.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\8\ 
Separately, the Exchange

[[Page 58417]]

has provided the SEC staff with multiple examples of instances where 
pricing changes by BX and other exchanges have resulted in shifts in 
exchange market share. Within the foregoing context, the proposal 
represents a reasonable attempt by the Exchange to increase its 
liquidity and market share relative to its competitors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Exchange perceives no regulatory, structural, or cost 
impediments to market participants shifting order flow away from it. 
In particular, the Exchange notes that these examples of shifts in 
liquidity and market share, along with many others, have occurred 
within the context of market participants' existing duties of Best 
Execution and obligations under the Order Protection Rule under 
Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has designed its proposed schedule of charges to 
provide increased overall incentives to members to increase their 
liquidity adding activity on the Exchange. An increase in liquidity 
adding activity on the Exchange will, in turn, improve the quality of 
the Nasdaq BX market and increase its attractiveness to existing and 
prospective participants. Generally, the proposed new charge will be 
comparable to, if not favorable to, those that its competitors 
provide.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See n. 7, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that those participants that are dissatisfied 
with the proposed charge are free to shift their order flow to 
competing venues that offer them lower fees.
The Proposal Is an Equitable Allocation of Charges
    The Exchange believes its proposal will allocate its proposed new 
charge fairly among its market participants. It is equitable for the 
Exchange to charge a discounted fee to participants whose displayed 
orders add liquidity to the Exchange as a means of incentivizing 
increased liquidity adding activity on the Exchange as well as to tie 
the charge to the member engaging in a threshold volume of liquidity 
adding activity on the Exchange. An increase in liquidity adding 
activity on the Exchange will improve the quality of the Nasdaq BX 
market and increase its attractiveness to existing and prospective 
participants.
    Any participant that is dissatisfied with the proposed new charge 
is free to shift their order flow to competing venues that provide more 
favorable pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.
The Proposed Charge Is not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly 
discriminatory. As an initial matter, the Exchange believes that 
nothing about its volume-based tiered pricing model is inherently 
unfair; instead, it is a rational pricing model that is well-
established and ubiquitous in today's economy among firms in various 
industries--from co-branded credit cards to grocery stores to cellular 
telephone data plans--that use it to reward the loyalty of their best 
customers that provide high levels of business activity and incent 
other customers to increase the extent of their business activity. It 
is also a pricing model that the Exchange and its competitors have long 
employed with the assent of the Commission. It is fair because it 
incentivizes customer activity that increases liquidity, enhances price 
discovery, and improves the overall quality of the equity markets.
    The Exchange intends for its proposal to improve market quality for 
all members on the Exchange and by extension attract more liquidity to 
the market, improving market wide quality and price discovery. Both net 
removers and net adders of liquidity to the Exchange stand to benefit 
directly from the proposed change. That is, to the extent that the 
proposed change increases liquidity adding activity on the Exchange, 
this will improve market quality and the attractiveness of the Nasdaq 
BX market, to the benefit of all existing and prospective participants.
    Moreover, any participant that is dissatisfied with the proposed 
new charge is free to shift their order flow to competing venues that 
provide more favorable pricing or less stringent qualifying criteria.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that its proposal will place any 
category of Exchange participant at a competitive disadvantage. As 
noted above, all members of the Exchange will benefit from any increase 
in market activity that the proposal effectuates. Members may grow or 
modify their businesses so that they can receive the discounted fee. 
Moreover, members are free to trade on other venues to the extent they 
believe that the fee charged is not attractive. As one can observe by 
looking at any market share chart, price competition between exchanges 
is fierce, with liquidity and market share moving freely between 
exchanges in reaction to fee and credit changes. The Exchange notes 
that the tier structure is consistent with broker-dealer fee practices 
as well as the other industries, as described above.
Intermarket Competition
    Addressing whether the proposal could impose a burden on 
competition on other SROs that is not necessary or appropriate, the 
Exchange believes that its proposed modifications to its schedule of 
charges will not impose a burden on competition because the Exchange's 
execution services are completely voluntary and subject to extensive 
competition both from a multitude of other live exchanges and off-
exchange venues. 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 and with 
alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance 
with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because 
competitors are free to modify their 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.
    The proposed new charge is reflective of this competition because, 
as a threshold issue, the Exchange is a relatively small market so its 
ability to burden intermarket competition is limited. In this regard, 
even the largest U.S. equities exchange by volume has less than 17-18% 
market share, which in most markets could hardly be categorized as 
having enough market power to burden competition. Moreover, as noted 
above, price competition between exchanges is fierce, with liquidity 
and market share moving freely between exchanges in reaction to fee and 
credit changes. This is in addition to free flow of order flow to and 
among off-exchange venues which presently comprises approximately 44% 
of industry volume.
    The Exchange intends for the proposed change to its schedule of 
fees to increase member incentives to engage in the addition of 
liquidity to the Exchange. These changes are procompetitive and 
reflective of the Exchange's efforts to make it an attractive and 
vibrant venue to market participants.
    In sum, if the changes proposed herein is unattractive to market 
participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as 
a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed 
change will impair the ability of members or competing order execution 
venues to

[[Page 58418]]

maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed 
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 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

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include 
File Number SR-BX-2020-025 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     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-BX-2020-025. 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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). 
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written 
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with 
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed 
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those 
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions 
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in 
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection 
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments 
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are 
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying 
information from comment submissions. You should submit only 
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions 
should refer to File Number SR-BX-2020-025 and should be submitted on 
or before October 9, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-20568 Filed 9-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


