Document ID: SEC-2018-1465-0001
Agency: sec
Document Type: Notice
Title: Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
Posted Date: 2018-09-20T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 183 (Thursday, September 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47666-47673]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20435]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84127; File No. SR-FINRA-2018-034]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory 
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a 
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 2360 (Options) To Increase Position 
Limits on Options on Certain Exchange-Traded Funds

September 14, 2018.
    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 August 31, 2018, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' 
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and 
II below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. FINRA has designated 
the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-controversial'' rule 
change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under the Act,\3\ which 
renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the 
Commission. 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.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 2360 (Options) to increase 
the position limit for conventional options on the following exchange-
traded funds (``ETF''): The Standard and Poor's Depositary Receipts 
Trust (``SPY''), iShares Russell 2000 ETF (``IWM''), PowerShares QQQ 
Trust (``QQQ''), iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (``EEM''), iShares 
China Large-Cap ETF (``FXI''), iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (``EFA''), iShares 
MSCI Brazil Capped ETF (``EWZ''), iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond Fund 
ETF (``TLT''), and iShares MSCI Japan ETF (``EWJ'').
    Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new 
language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets.
* * * * *

2360. Options

    (a) No Change.

(b) Requirements

    (1) through (2) No Change.

(3) Position Limits

    (A) Stock Options--
    (i) through (ii) No Change.
    (iii) Conventional Equity Options
    a. For purposes of this paragraph (b), standardized equity option 
contracts of the put class and call class on the same side of the 
market overlying the same security shall not be aggregated with 
conventional equity option contracts or FLEX Equity Option contracts 
overlying the same security on the same side of the market. 
Conventional equity option contracts of the put class and call class on 
the same side of the market overlying the same security shall be 
subject to a position limit of:
    1. through 5. No Change.
    6. for selected conventional options on exchange-traded funds 
(``ETF''), the position limits are listed in the chart below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Security underlying option                                     Position limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DIAMONDS Trust (DIA).....................  300,000 contracts.
The Standard and Poor's Depositary Receipts    [900,000]1,800,000 contracts.
 Trust (SPY).
The iShares Russell 2000 [Index Fund]ETF       [500,000]1,000,000 contracts.
 (IWM).
The PowerShares QQQ Trust (QQQ[Q])...........  [900,000]1,800,000 contracts.
The iShares MSCI Emerging Markets [Index       [500,000]1,000,000 contracts.
 Fund]ETF (EEM).
iShares China Large-Cap ETF (FXI)............  500,000 contracts.
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA)..................  500,000 contracts.
iShares MSCI Brazil Capped ETF (EWZ).........  500,000 contracts.
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond Fund ETF (TLT)  500,000 contracts.
iShares MSCI Japan ETF (EWJ).................  500,000 contracts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 47667]]

    b. No Change.
    (B) through (D) No Change.
    (4) through (24) No Change.
    (c) No Change.

   Supplementary Material:----

    .01 through .03 No Change.
* * * * *

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

    In its filing with the Commission, FINRA 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. FINRA 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
    FINRA Rule 2360(b)(3)(A) imposes a position limit on the number of 
equity options contracts in each class on the same side of the market 
that can be held or written by a member, a person associated with a 
member, or a customer or a group of customers acting in concert. 
Position limits are intended to prevent the establishment of options 
positions that can be used to manipulate or disrupt the underlying 
market or might create incentives to manipulate or disrupt the 
underlying market so as to benefit the options position. In addition, 
position limits serve to reduce the potential for disruption of the 
options market itself, especially in illiquid options classes.\4\ This 
consideration has been balanced by the concern that the limits ``not be 
established at levels that are so low as to discourage participation in 
the options market by institutions and other investors with substantial 
hedging needs or to prevent specialists and market makers from 
adequately meeting their obligations to maintain a fair and orderly 
market.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40969 (January 22, 
1999), 64 FR 4911, 4912-4913 (February 1, 1999) (Order Approving 
File No. SR-CBOE-98-23) (citing H.R. No. IFC-3, 96th Cong., 1st 
Sess. at 189-91 (Comm. Print 1978)).
    \5\ Id. at 4913.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 2360(b)(3)(A)(i) does not independently establish a position 
limit for standardized equity options. Rather, the position limit 
established by the rules of an options exchange for a particular equity 
option is the applicable position limit for purposes of Rule 2360.\6\ 
Rule 2360(b)(3)(A)(iii) provides that conventional equity options are 
subject to a basic position limit of 25,000 contracts or a higher tier 
for conventional option contracts on securities that underlie exchange-
traded options qualifying for such higher tier as determined by the 
rules of the options exchanges. In addition, FINRA lists position 
limits for options on securities that have higher position limits--
currently, only the ETFs listed in Rule 2360(b)(3)(A)(iii)a.6.--that 
also generally mirror the options exchange position limits.\7\ At this 
time, FINRA proposes to conform to the options exchanges' recent 
amendments that increased (or in the case of SPY decreased from the 
pilot program) the position limit options on the following ETFs: SPY, 
IWM, QQQ, EEM, FXI, EFA, EWZ, TLT and EWJ.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See e.g., CBOE Rule 4.11; ISE Rule 412; NASDAQ PHLX Rule 
1001; NYSE American Rule 904; NYSE Arca Rule 6.8; MIAX Rule 307; BOX 
Rule 3120 and IM-3120-2; Nasdaq Chapter III, Section 7; BX Chapter 
III, Section 7; and BZX Rule 18.7.
    \7\ The options exchanges have recently revised the position 
limit on SPY options to 1,800,000 contracts after expiration of a 
pilot program on July 12, 2018 that eliminated position limits on 
SPY options. FINRA retained its position for conventional options on 
SPY at 900,000 contracts. The proposed rule change proposes to 
increase the position limit on SPY to 1,800,000 consistent with the 
options exchanges updating the position limit on SPY to 1,800,000 
contracts. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83349 (May 30, 
2018), 83 FR 26123 (June 5, 2018) (Notice of Filing and Immediate 
Effectiveness of File No. SR-MIAX-2018-11). See also Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 83412 (June 12, 2018), 83 FR 28298 (June 
18, 2018) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No. 
SR-PHLX-2018-44); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83414 (June 
12, 2018), 83 FR 28296 (June 18, 2018) (Notice of Filing and 
Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-BOX-2018-22); Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 83415 (June 12, 2018), 83 FR 28274 (June 
18, 2018) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No. 
SR-CBOE-2018-042); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83413 (June 
12, 2018), 83 FR 28277 (June 18, 2018) (Notice of Filing and 
Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-NYSEArca-2018-44); and 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83417 (June 12, 2018), 83 FR 
28279 (June 18, 2018) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness 
of File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2018-26).
    \8\ See note 7 for discussion regarding position limits for 
options on SPY. See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82770 
(February 23, 2018), 83 FR 8907 (March 1, 2018) (Order Granting 
Accelerated Approval of File No. SR-CBOE-2017-057). See also 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82931 (March 22, 2018), 83 FR 
13323 (March 28, 2018) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness 
of File No. SR-MIAX-2018-10); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 
82930 (March 22, 2018), 83 FR 13330 (March 28, 2018) (Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-BOX-2018-10); 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82932 (March 22, 2018), 83 FR 
13316 (March 28, 2018) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness 
of File No. SR-PHLX-2018-24); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 
83066 (April 19, 2018), 83 FR 18099 (April 25, 2018) (Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-NYSEArca-2018-23) 
and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83065 (April 19, 2018), 83 
FR 18093 (April 25, 2018) (Notice of Filing and Immediate 
Effectiveness of File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2018-14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would amend the table provided in Rule 
2360(b)(3)(A)(iii)a.6. as follows:
     The position limits for options on SPY would be increased 
from 900,000 contracts to 1,800,000 contracts;
     The position limit for options on IWM would be increased 
from 500,000 contracts to 1,000,000 contracts;
     The position limit for options on QQQ would be increased 
from 900,000 contracts to 1,800,000 contracts; and
     The position limit for options on EEM would be increased 
from 500,000 contracts to 1,000,000 contracts.
    In addition, the proposed rule change would add to the table 
provided in Rule 2360(b)(3)(A)(iii)a.6. as follows, with the effect of 
each ETF being increased from the current position limit of 250,000 
contracts:
     The position limit for options on FXI would be increased 
to 500,000 contracts;
     The position limit for options on EFA would be increased 
to 500,000 contracts;
     The position limit for options on EWZ would be increased 
to 500,000 contracts;
     The position limit for options on TLT would be increased 
to 500,000 contracts; and
     The position limit for options on EWJ would be increased 
to 500,000 contracts.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The proposed rule filing would also make certain wording 
changes to the listing of the names of the ETFs and change in two 
places ``Index Fund'' to ``ETF''. The proposed rule filing would 
also revise the symbol of The PowerShares QQQ Trust to ``QQQ.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of the proposed rule change, as noted by Cboe, position 
limits are determined by the option exchange's requirements according 
to the number of outstanding shares and the trading volume of the 
underlying ETF over the past six months.\10\ The ETFs that underlie 
options subject to the proposed rule change are highly liquid, and are 
based on a broad set of highly liquid securities and other reference 
assets. The above listed ETFs are listed on various national securities 
exchanges and meet their listing standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See for example, Cboe Rule 4.11 Interpretations and 
Policies: .02.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FXI tracks the performance of the FTSE China 50 Index, which is 
composed of the 50 largest Chinese stocks.\11\ EEM tracks the 
performance of

[[Page 47668]]

the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, which is composed of approximately 800 
component securities from emerging market countries from all over the 
world.\12\ IWM tracks the performance of the Russell 2000 Index, which 
is composed of 2,000 small-cap domestic stocks.\13\ EFA tracks the 
performance of MSCI EAFE Index, which has over 900 component 
securities.\14\ The MSCI EAFE Index is designed to represent the 
performance of large and mid-cap securities across 21 developed 
markets, including countries in Europe, Australia and the Far East, 
excluding the U.S. and Canada.\15\ EWZ tracks the performance of the 
MSCI Brazil 25/50 Index, which is composed of shares of large and mid-
size companies in Brazil.\16\ TLT tracks the performance of ICE U.S. 
Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index, which is composed of long-term U.S. 
Treasury bonds.\17\ QQQ tracks the performance of the Nasdaq-100 Index, 
which is composed of 100 of the largest domestic and international non-
financial companies listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC 
(``Nasdaq'').\18\ EWJ tracks the MSCI Japan Index, which tracks the 
performance of large and mid-sized companies in Japan.\19\ SPY tracks 
the performance of the S&P 500[supreg] Index, which is an index of 
diversified large cap U.S. companies.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239536/ishares-china-largecap-etf.
    \12\ See https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239637/ishares-msci-emerging-markets-etf.
    \13\ See https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239710/ishares-russell-2000-etf.
    \14\ See https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239623/.
    \15\ See https://www.msci.com/eafe.
    \16\ See https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239612/ishares-msci-brazil-capped-etf.
    \17\ See https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239454/.
    \18\ See https://indexes.nasdaqomx.com/Index/Overview/NDX.
    \19\ See https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239665/EWJ.
    \20\ See https://us.spdrs.com/en/etf/spdr-sp-500-etf-SPY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of this proposal, all trading and other statistics, 
except SPY which were compiled by FINRA, have been compiled by Cboe as 
of the dates provided by Cboe and provided in its proposed rule change 
to increase the applicable positions limits: \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See note 8.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     2017 ADV         Shares
                       ETF                           2017 ADV         (option       outstanding     Fund market
                                                   (mil. shares)    contracts)        (mil.)       cap.  ($mil.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FXI.............................................           15.08          71,944            78.6        $3,343.6
EEM.............................................           52.12         287,357           797.4        34,926.1
IWM.............................................           27.46         490,070           253.1        35,809.1
EFA.............................................           19.42          98,844          1178.4        78,870.3
EWZ.............................................           17.08          95,152           159.4         6,023.4
TLT.............................................            8.53          80,476            60.0         7,442.4
QQQ.............................................           26.25         579,404           351.6        50,359.7
EWJ.............................................            6.06           4,715           303.6        16,625.1
SPY.............................................           64.63       2,575,153          976.23       240,540.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA agrees as proposed by Cboe that the liquidity in the 
underlying ETFs, and the liquidity in the ETF options support its 
request to increase the position limits for the options subject to the 
proposed rule change. As to the underlying ETF shares, the average 
daily trading volume across all exchanges for the period of January 1 
to July 31, 2017 was: (i) FXI-15.08 million shares; (ii) EEM-52.12 
million shares; (iii) IWM-27.46 million shares; (iv) EFA-19.42 million 
shares; (v) EWZ-17.08 million shares; (vi) TLT-8.53 million shares; 
(vii) QQQ- 26.25 million shares; (vii) EWJ-6.06 million shares; and 
(viii) SPY-64.63 million shares.
    In proposing the increased position limits, FINRA considered the 
availability of economically equivalent products and their respective 
position limits. For instance, some of the ETFs underlying options 
subject to this proposal are based on broad-based indices that underlie 
cash-settled options that are economically equivalent to the ETF 
options that are the subject of this proposal and have no position 
limits (NDX and SPX). Other ETFs are based on broad-based indexes that 
underlie cash-settled options with position limits reflecting notional 
values that are larger than the current position limits for ETF 
analogues (EEM and EFA). Where there was no approved index analogue, 
FINRA believes, based on the liquidity, breadth and depth of the 
underlying market, that the index referenced by the ETF would be 
considered a broad-based index (example FXI and EWJ).\22\ FINRA 
believes that if certain position limits are appropriate for the 
options overlying the same index, or an analogue to the basket of 
securities that the ETF tracks, then those same economically equivalent 
position limits should be appropriate for the option overlying the ETF. 
In addition, the market capitalization of the underlying index or 
reference asset is large enough to absorb any price movements that may 
be caused by an oversized trade. Also, the issuer may look to the 
stocks comprising the analogous underlying index or reference asset 
when seeking to create additional ETF shares which are part of the 
creation/redemption process to address supply and demand or to mitigate 
the price movement of the price of the ETF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ FINRA Rule 2360(b)(3)(B) establishes position limits for 
index options by incorporating by reference the position limit 
established by the options exchange on which the option trades. 
Options exchanges establish rules for index options based on the 
characteristic of the underlying index. See, e.g., Cboe Rule 24.4 
and MIAX Rule 1804.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, the PowerShares QQQ Trust or QQQ is an ETF that tracks 
the Nasdaq 100 Index or NDX, which is an index composed of 100 of the 
largest non-financial securities listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC 
(``Nasdaq''). Options on NDX are currently subject to no position 
limits but share similar trading characteristics as QQQ. Based on QQQ's 
share price of $154.5422 and NDX's index level of 6,339.14, 
approximately 40 contracts of QQQ equals one contract of NDX. Assume 
that options on NDX are subject to the standard position limit of 
25,000 contracts for broad-based index options under options exchange 
rules. Based on the above comparison of notional values, this would 
result in a position limit equivalent to 1,000,000 contracts for QQQ as 
NDX's analogue. However, options on NDX are not subject to position 
limits and has an average daily trading volume of 15,300 contracts. 
Options on QQQ are currently subject to a position limit of 900,000 
contracts but has a much higher average daily trading volume of 579,404 
contracts. Furthermore, NDX currently has a market capitalization of 
$17.2 trillion and QQQ has a market capitalization of

[[Page 47669]]

$50,359.7 million, and the component securities of NDX, in aggregate, 
have traded an average of 440 million shares per day in 2017, both 
market capitalizations being large enough to absorb any price movement 
caused by a large trade in the QQQ. The Commission has also approved no 
position limit for options on NDX, although it has a much lower daily 
trading volume than its analogue, the QQQ. Therefore, FINRA believes it 
is reasonable to increase the position limit for options on QQQ from 
900,000 to 1,800,000 contracts.
    The SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] ETF Trust or SPY seeks to provide 
investment results that, before expenses, correspond generally to the 
price and yield performance of the S&P 500[supreg] Index or SPX, which 
is an index composed of 500 large-cap U.S. companies. Options on the 
SPX have no position limits and share similar trading characteristics 
as SPY. Based on SPY's price of $263.15 and SPX's index level of 
2640.87, approximately 10 contracts of SPY equals one contract of 
SPX.\23\ Assume that options on SPX are subject to the standard 
position limit of 25,000 contracts for broad-based index options under 
options exchange rules. Based on the above comparison of notional 
values, this would result in a position limit equivalent to 250,000 
contracts for options on SPY as SPX's analogue. However, options on SPX 
are not subject to position limits and has an average daily trading 
volume of 1,101,185 contracts.\24\ Options on SPY were recently changed 
to a position limit of 1,800,000 contracts for standardized options, 
but is currently subject to a conventional option position limit of 
900,000 contracts but has a much higher average daily trading volume of 
2,575,153 contracts.\25\ Furthermore, as of December 29, 2017, SPX had 
a market capitalization of $23.9 trillion and SPY has a market 
capitalization of $277.54 billion, large enough to absorb any price 
movement caused by a large trade in the SPY. The Commission has also 
approved no position limit for options on SPX, although it has a much 
lower daily trading volume than its analogue, the SPY, for which the 
exchanges recently changed the position limit to 1,800,000 contracts. 
Therefore, FINRA believes it is reasonable to increase the position 
limits for options on SPY from 900,000 to 1,800,000 contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ As of March 29, 2018.
    \24\ As of July 31, 2017.
    \25\ See note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The iShares Russell 2000 ETF or IWM, is an ETF that also tracks the 
Russell 2000 index or RUT, which is an index composed of 2,000 small-
cap domestic companies in the Russell 2000 index. Options on RUT are 
currently subject to no position limits but share similar trading 
characteristics as IWM. Based on IWM's share price of $144.77 and RUT's 
index level of 1,486.88, approximately 10 contracts of IWM equals one 
contract of RUT. Assume that options on RUT are subject to the standard 
position limit of 25,000 contracts for broad-based index options under 
options exchange rules. Based on the above comparison of notional 
values, this would result in a position limit equivalent to 250,000 
contracts for options on IWM as RUT's analogue. However, options on RUT 
are not subject to position limits and has an average daily trading 
volume of 66,200 contracts. Options on IWM are currently subject to a 
position limit of 500,000 contracts but has a much higher average daily 
trading volume of 490,070 contracts. The Commission has approved no 
position limit for options on RUT, although it has a much lower average 
daily trading volume than its analogue, the IWM. Furthermore, RUT 
currently has a market capitalization of $2.4 trillion and IWM has a 
market capitalization of $35,809.1 million, and the component 
securities of RUT, in aggregate, have traded an average of 270 million 
shares per day in 2017, both large enough to absorb any price movement 
caused by a large trade in the IWM. Therefore, FINRA believes it is 
reasonable to increase the position limit for options on IWM from 
500,000 to 1,000,000 contracts.
    EEM tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Index or 
MXEF, which is composed of approximately 800 component securities from 
emerging market countries from all over the world. Below makes the same 
notional value comparisons as made above. Based on EEM's share price of 
$47.06 and MXEF's index level of 1,136.45, approximately 24 contracts 
of EEM equals one contract of MXEF. Assume that options on MXEF are 
subject to the standard position limit of 25,000 contracts for broad-
based index options under options exchange rules. Based on the above 
comparison of notional values, this would result in a position limit 
economically equivalent to 604,000 contracts for options on EEM as 
MXEF's analogue. However, MXEF has an average daily trading volume of 
180 contracts. Options on EEM is currently subject to a position limit 
of 500,000 contracts but has a much higher average daily trading volume 
of 287,357 contracts. Furthermore, MXEF currently has a market 
capitalization of $5.18 trillion and EEM has a market capitalization of 
$34,926.1 million, and the component securities of MXEF, in aggregate, 
have traded an average of 33.6 billion shares per day in 2017, both 
large enough to absorb any price movement caused by a large trade in 
the EEM. Therefore, based on the comparison of average daily trading 
volume, FINRA believes it is reasonable to increase the position limit 
for options on EEM from 500,000 to 1,000,000 contracts.
    EFA tracks the performance of the MSCI EAFE Index or MXEA, which 
has over 900 component securities designed to represent the performance 
of large and mid-cap securities across 21 developed markets, including 
countries in Europe, Australia and the Far East, excluding the U.S. and 
Canada. Below makes the same notional value comparison as made above. 
Based on EFA's share price of $69.16 and MXEA's index level of 
1,986.15, approximately 29 contracts of EFA equals one contract of 
MXEA. Assume options on MXEA are subject to the standard position limit 
of 25,000 contracts for broad-based index options under options 
exchange rules. Based on the above comparison of notional values, this 
would result in a position limit economically equivalent to 721,000 
contracts for EFA as MXEA's analogue. Furthermore, MXEA currently has a 
market capitalization of $18.7 trillion and EFA has a market 
capitalization of $78,870.3 million, and the component securities of 
MXEA, in aggregate, have traded an average of 4.6 billion shares per 
day in 2017, both large enough to absorb any price movement caused by a 
large trade in EFA. However, MXEA has an average daily trading volume 
of 270 contracts. Options on EFA is currently subject to a position 
limit of 250,000 contracts but has a much higher average daily trading 
volume of 98,844 contracts. Based on the above comparisons, FINRA 
believes it is reasonable to increase the position limit for options on 
EFA from 250,000 to 500,000 contracts.
    FXI tracks the performance of the FTSE China 50 Index, which is 
composed of the 50 largest Chinese stocks. There is currently no index 
analogue for FXI approved for options trading. Options on FXI are 
currently subject to a position limit of 250,000 contracts but has a 
much higher average daily trading volume of 15.08 million shares. 
However, the FTSE China 50 Index currently has a market capitalization 
of $1.7 trillion and FXI has a market capitalization of $2,623.18 
million, both large enough to absorb any price movement caused by a 
large trade

[[Page 47670]]

in FXI. The components of the FTSE China 50 Index, in aggregate, have 
an average daily trading volume of 2.3 billion shares. Based on the 
above comparisons, FINRA believes it is reasonable to increase the 
position limit for options on FXI from 250,000 to 500,000 contracts.
    EWZ tracks the performance of the MSCI Brazil 25/50 Index, which is 
composed of shares of large and mid-size companies in Brazil. There is 
currently no index analogue for EWZ approved for options trading. 
Options on EWZ are currently subject to a position limit of 250,000 
contracts but the ETF has a much higher average daily trading volume of 
17.08 million shares. However, the MSCI Brazil 25/50 Index currently 
has a market capitalization of $700 billion and EWZ has a market 
capitalization of $6,023.4 million, both large enough to absorb any 
price movement caused by a large trade in EWZ. The components of the 
MSCI Brazil 25/50 Index, in aggregate, have an average daily trading 
volume of 285 million shares. Based on the above comparisons, FINRA 
believes it is reasonable to increase the position limit for options on 
EWZ from 250,000 to 500,000 contracts.
    TLT tracks the performance of the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond 
Index, which is composed of long-term U.S. Treasury bonds. There is 
currently no index analogue for TLT approved for options trading. 
However, the U.S. Treasury market is one of the largest and most liquid 
markets in the world, with over $14 trillion outstanding and turnover 
of approximately $500 billion per day. TLT currently has a market 
capitalization of $7,442.4 million, both large enough to absorb any 
price movement caused by a large trade in TLT. Therefore, any potential 
for manipulation will not increase solely due to the increase in 
position limits as set forth in this proposal. Based on the above 
comparisons, FINRA believes it is reasonable to increase the position 
limit for options on TLT from 250,000 to 500,000 contracts.
    EWJ tracks the MSCI Japan Index, which tracks the performance of 
large and mid-sized companies in Japan. There is currently no index 
analogue for EWJ approved for options trading. However, the MSCI Japan 
Index has a market capitalization of $3.5 trillion and EWJ has a market 
capitalization of $16,625.1 million, and the component securities of 
the MSCI Japan Index, in aggregate, have traded an average of 1.1 
billion shares per day in 2017, both large enough to absorb any price 
movement caused by a large trade in EWJ. Options on EWJ is currently 
subject to a position limit of 250,000 contracts and has an average 
daily trading volume of 6.6 million shares. Based on the above 
comparisons, FINRA believes it is reasonable to increase the position 
limit for options on EWJ from 250,000 to 500,000 contracts.
    FINRA believes that increasing the position limits for the 
conventional options subject to the proposed rule change would lead to 
a more liquid and competitive market environment for these options, 
which will benefit customers interested in these products.
Surveillance and Reporting
    Further, FINRA believes that the increased position limits 
provisions are appropriate in light of the existing surveillance 
procedures and reporting requirements at FINRA,\26\ the options 
exchanges, and at the several clearing firms, which are capable of 
properly identifying unusual or illegal trading activity. These 
procedures use daily monitoring of market movements by automated 
surveillance techniques to identify unusual activity in both options 
and underlying stocks.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Rule 2360(b)(5) for the options reporting requirements.
    \27\ These procedures have been effective for the surveillance 
of options trading and will continue to be employed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, large stock holdings must be disclosed to the 
Commission by way of Schedules 13D or 13G.\28\ Options positions are 
part of any reportable positions and cannot legally be hidden. 
Moreover, the previously noted Rule 2360(b)(5) requirement that members 
must file reports with FINRA for any customer that held aggregate large 
long or short positions of any single class for the previous day will 
continue to serve as an important part of FINRA's surveillance efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 240.13d-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, FINRA believes that the current financial requirements 
imposed by FINRA and by the Commission adequately address financial 
responsibility concerns that a member or its customer will maintain an 
inordinately large unhedged position in any option with a higher 
position limit. Current margin and risk-based haircut methodologies 
serve to limit the size of positions maintained by any one account by 
increasing the margin or capital that a member must maintain for a 
large position. Under Rule 4210(f)(8)(A), FINRA also may impose a 
higher margin requirement upon a member when FINRA determines a higher 
requirement is warranted. In addition, the Commission's net capital 
rule \29\ imposes a capital charge on members to the extent of any 
margin deficiency resulting from the higher margin requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 240.15c3-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate 
effectiveness and has requested that the SEC waive the requirement that 
the proposed rule change not become operative for 30 days after the 
date of the filing, so FINRA can implement the proposed rule change 
immediately.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\30\ which requires, among 
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent 
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable 
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the 
public interest. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change promotes 
consistent regulation by harmonizing position limits with those of the 
other self-regulatory organizations. FINRA further believes that 
increasing the position limit on conventional options promotes 
consistent regulation by harmonizing the position limit with its 
standardized counterpart. In addition, FINRA believes the proposed rule 
change will be beneficial to large market makers and institutions 
(which generally have the greatest ability to provide liquidity and 
depth in products that may be subject to higher position limits as has 
been the case with recently approved increased position limits),\31\ as 
well as retail traders and public customers, by providing them with a 
more effective trading and hedging vehicle. In addition, FINRA believes 
that the structure of the options subject to the proposed rule change 
and the considerable liquidity of the market for those options 
diminishes the opportunity to manipulate these products and disrupt the 
underlying market that a lower position limit may protect against.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
    \31\ See note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Increased position limits for select actively traded options, such 
as those proposed herein, is not novel and has been previously approved 
by the Commission. For example, the Commission has previously approved 
a position limit of 1,800,000 contracts on options on SPY.\32\ 
Additionally, the Commission has approved similar proposed rule changes 
by the options exchanges to increase position and exercise limits for 
options on highly

[[Page 47671]]

liquid, actively-traded ETFs,\33\ including a proposal to permanently 
eliminate the position and exercise limits for options overlaying the 
S&P 500 Index, S&P 100 Index, Dow Jones Industrial Average, and Nasdaq 
100 Index.\34\ In approving the permanent elimination of position and 
exercise limits, the Commission relied heavily upon surveillance 
capabilities, and the Commission expressed trust in the enhanced 
surveillance and reporting safeguards in order to detect and deter 
possible manipulative behavior, which might arise from eliminating 
position and exercise limits.\35\ Furthermore, as described more fully 
above, options on other ETFs have the position limits proposed herein, 
but their trading volumes are significantly lower than the ETFs subject 
to the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See note 7.
    \33\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68086 (October 23, 
2012), 77 FR 65600 (October 29, 2012) (Order Approving File No. SR-
CBOE-2012-66); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68478 (December 
19, 2012), 77 FR 76132 (December 26, 2012) (Notice of Filing and 
Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-BOX-2012-23); Securities 
Exchange Act Release No. 68398 (December 11, 2012), 77 FR 74700 
(December 17, 2012) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 
File No. SR-ISE-2012-93); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68293 
(November 27, 2012), 77 FR 71644 (December 3, 2012) (Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-Phlx-2012-132); 
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68358 (December 5, 2012), 77 FR 
73708 (December 11, 2012) (Notice of Filing and Immediate 
Effectiveness of File No. SR-NYSE MKT-2012-71); Securities Exchange 
Act Release No. 68359 (December 5, 2012), 77 FR 73716 (December 11, 
2012) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-
NYSE Arca-2012-132) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69457 
(April 25, 2013), 78 FR 25502 (May 1, 2013) (Notice of Filing and 
Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-MIAX-2013-17).
    \34\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44994 (October 26, 
2001), 66 FR 55722 (November 2, 2001) (Order Approving File No. SR-
CBOE-2001-22) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52650 (October 
21, 2005), 70 FR 62147 (October 28, 2005) (Order Approving File No. 
SR-CBOE-2005-41) (``NDX Approval'').
    \35\ See NDX Approval at 62149.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the proposed position limits would continue to address 
potential manipulative activity while allowing for potential hedging 
activity for appropriate economic purposes. The creation and redemption 
process for these ETFs also lessens the potential for manipulative 
activity. When an ETF company wants to create more ETF shares, it looks 
to an Authorized Participant, which is a market maker or other large 
financial institution, to acquire the securities the ETF is to hold. 
For instance, IWM is designed to track the performance of the Russell 
2000 Index. The Authorized Participant will purchase all the Russell 
2000 constituent securities in the exact same weight as the index, then 
deliver those shares to the ETF provider. In exchange, the ETF provider 
gives the Authorized Participant a block of equally valued ETF shares, 
on a one-for-one fair value basis. The price is based on the net asset 
value, not the market value at which the ETF is trading. The creation 
of new ETF units can be conducted all trading day and is not subject to 
position limits. This process can also work in reverse where the ETF 
company seeks to decrease the number of shares that are available to 
trade. The creation and redemption process, therefore, creates a direct 
link to the underlying components of the ETF, and serves to mitigate 
potential price impact of the ETF shares that might otherwise result 
from increased position limits.
    The ETF creation and redemption process keeps ETF share prices 
trading in line with the ETF's underlying net asset value. Because an 
ETF trades like a stock, its price will fluctuate during the trading 
day, due to simple supply and demand. If demand to buy an ETF is high, 
for instance, the ETF's share price might rise above the value of its 
underlying securities. When this happens, an Authorized Participant can 
arbitrage this difference by buying the underlying shares that compose 
the ETF and then selling the ETF shares on the open market. This drives 
the ETF's share price back toward fair value. Likewise, if the ETF 
starts trading at a discount to the securities it holds, the Authorized 
Participant can buy shares of the ETF and redeem them for the 
underlying securities. Buying undervalued ETF shares drives the price 
of the ETF back toward fair value. This arbitrage process helps to keep 
an ETF's price in line with the value of its underlying portfolio.
    Lastly, the Commission expressed the belief that removing position 
and exercise limits may bring additional depth and liquidity without 
increasing concerns regarding intermarket manipulation or disruption of 
the options or the underlying securities.\36\ FINRA's existing 
surveillance and reporting safeguards are designed to deter and detect 
possible manipulative behavior, which might arise from eliminating 
position and exercise limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See NDX Approval at 62149.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in 
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Economic Impact Analysis
    FINRA has undertaken an economic impact assessment, as set forth 
below, to analyze the potential economic impacts, including anticipated 
costs, benefits, and distributional and competitive effects transfers 
of wealth, relative to the current baseline, and the alternatives FINRA 
considered in assessing how to best meet its regulatory objectives.
Regulatory Objective
    FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 2360 to harmonize FINRA's position 
limits for conventional options with the position limit for 
standardized options.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Economic Baseline
    Per FINRA Rule 2360(b)(30)(A)(iii) conventional equity options are 
subject to a basic position limit of 25,000 contracts or higher for 
conventional option contracts on securities that underlie exchange-
traded options qualifying for a higher tier as determined by option 
exchange rules. The existing position limits for conventional options 
on ETFs are: 900,000 contracts for SPY or QQQ, 500,000 contracts for 
IWM or EEM, and 250,000 contracts for FXI, EFA, EWZ, TLT, or EWJ. 
Option exchanges have recently increased (or in the case of SPY 
decreased from the pilot program) position limit options on several 
ETFs such as SPY, IWM, QQQ, EEM, FXI, EFA, EWZ, TLT, and EWJ.
Economic Impact
Benefits
    As noted above, the proposed rule change would amend Rule 2360 to 
harmonize FINRA's position limits for conventional options with the 
position limit for standardized options.\38\ For investors that short 
conventional equity options or buy them long, there is likely to be a 
natural size for an executed order that minimizes fixed and variable 
transaction costs, including but not limited to the bid-ask spread, 
price impact, and transaction fees. If the existing position limits for 
conventional equity options on select ETFs constrains the order size 
such that fixed and variable transaction costs are higher than optimal, 
then investors may benefit if the new position limit is no less than 
the natural size. In such an event, the cost to hedge an ETF would 
decline, thereby making it less costly to manage downside risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, if the existing position limits serve as a constraint, 
then an

[[Page 47672]]

increase in the position limit for conventional options on select ETFs 
would permit investors to more easily find a counterparty. If the 
number of counterparties increases, then the cost of hedging should 
decline as the half-spread narrows, thereby making it less expensive to 
manage downside risk.
    The extent of the constraint imposed by the current limit on 
conventional options is related to the ability of an investor to 
achieve similar economic exposure through other means. If there are 
other securities, such as an option on a closely related index, that 
exist and provide similar economic exposure less expensively, then the 
value of lessening the position limit on conventional options on ETFs 
is lower. Members may rely on information and data feeds from the 
Options Clearing Corporation to assist in their monitoring position 
limits. Because position limits on the standardized and conventional 
side have traditionally been consistent, members have relied on this 
feed for both standardized and conventional options. If the position 
limits between standardized and conventional options are conformed, 
then the cost from monitoring position limits should decline for member 
firms.
Cost
    The proposed rule change may impose limited operational cost on 
member firms that trade conventional options on ETFs, as these same 
firms would need to revise position limits that are used in trading 
systems. However, the proposed rule change should not impose additional 
costs, because it is difficult to disrupt or manipulate the underlying 
market, create an incentive to disrupt or manipulate the underlying 
market for the purpose of profiting from the options position, or 
disrupt or manipulate the options market for conventional options on 
ETFs affected by this proposed rule. ETFs that underlie options subject 
to the proposed rule change are highly liquid, and are based on a broad 
set of highly liquid securities, which makes the market difficult to 
manipulate or disrupt. In fact, options on certain broad-based security 
indexes have no position limits. Furthermore, the creation and 
redemption process for these ETFs reduces the potential for disruptive 
or manipulative activity. New ETF units may be created at any time 
during the trading day and are not subject to position limits. 
Consequently, there is a direct link between the underlying components 
of the ETF and the ETF, which keeps ETF share prices trading in line 
with the ETF's underlying net asset value.
Alternatives
    No further alternatives are under consideration.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) 
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public 
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) 
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such 
shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the 
protection of investors and the public interest, it has become 
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \39\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) \40\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \40\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission 
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along 
with a brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, 
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the 
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the 
Commission. FINRA has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay 
so that FINRA may immediately harmonize position limits with those of 
other self-regulatory organizations to ensure consistent regulation. 
For this reason, the Commission believes that waiving the 30-day 
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the 
public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative 
delay and designates the proposal operative upon filing.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, 
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on 
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 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 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 [email protected]. Please include 
File Number SR-FINRA-2018-034 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-FINRA-2018-034. 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 such filing also will be available for inspection 
and copying at the principal office of FINRA. 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-FINRA-2018-034, and should be submitted 
on or before October 11, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

[[Page 47673]]

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\42\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-20435 Filed 9-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P