Overview
Title
Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX Emerald, LLC (“MIAX Emerald” or “Exchange”); Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change by MIAX Emerald, LLC To Amend the Fee Schedule To Modify the Excessive Quoting Fee
Agencies
ELI5 AI
MIAX Emerald, a company that helps people buy and sell stocks, wants to change a special fee rule to help manage how many stock prices it shows all at once. The government group in charge of watching over them wants to know what people think before April 7, 2025.
Summary AI
MIAX Emerald, LLC, a securities exchange, has filed a proposal with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to change its Fee Schedule. The proposal seeks to adjust the inbound quote limit related to the Excessive Quoting Fee, aiming for immediate effectiveness. The SEC is asking for public comments on this rule change, which is available for review online on both the MIAX Emerald and SEC websites. Comments can be submitted via the SEC's online form, email, or mailed directly to the SEC by April 7, 2025, using file number SR-EMERALD-2025-05.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document is a notice from the Federal Register related to a change in the fee structure of MIAX Emerald, LLC, a securities exchange. MIAX Emerald has proposed an amendment to its Fee Schedule to modify the limits on what it calls the "Excessive Quoting Fee." The proposal has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which is responsible for overseeing securities exchanges in the United States. The SEC is inviting public comments on this proposed rule change until April 7, 2025.
General Summary
MIAX Emerald's proposal involves adjusting the inbound quote limit tied to their Excessive Quoting Fee. The plan has been designated for immediate effect, meaning it's intended to quickly come into force without the standard waiting period typically provided for public feedback. The proposal and its supporting documents are accessible online via the websites of MIAX Emerald and the SEC.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One primary concern is the complexity of the legal references within the document. References like "15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1)" and "17 CFR 240.19b-4" could confuse individuals unfamiliar with legal jargon. This could potentially limit the accessibility of the document to the general public, who may be interested in understanding its impact.
Moreover, the notice lacks a detailed explanation of how the Excessive Quoting Fee operates or the specific changes being proposed. Without this information, understanding the implications of the rule change is challenging for those not familiar with the exchange's fee structures. This absence of clear communication could hinder meaningful public commentary.
Impact on the Public
The broader public might not feel a direct impact from this specific rule change unless they are investors or entities interacting with MIAX Emerald's platform. For everyday investors, even those using the platform, changes in fee structures and rules can affect the operational costs passed onto them, albeit indirectly.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For traders and financial entities that engage heavily with MIAX Emerald, particularly those active in options trading, the change could significantly impact their quoting strategies and associated costs. Firms engaging in high-frequency trading, known for submitting a large number of quotes, could be directly affected depending on how the threshold for the Excessive Quoting Fee is adjusted.
From a regulatory perspective, the SEC's act of soliciting comments indicates openness to feedback, though the immediate effectiveness of the rule could be seen as bypassing a more democratic process of deliberation and public engagement.
In conclusion, while the document reflects procedural transparency, the complexity and lack of specificity may limit its accessibility and the potential for informed public participation. This highlights a broader challenge in ensuring regulatory changes are communicated in a manner that is understandable to both industry insiders and the general public.
Issues
• The document uses legal references (e.g., 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1), 17 CFR 240.19b-4) that might be difficult for individuals unfamiliar with legal terms to understand, and could benefit from a brief explanation.
• The document does not provide a detailed explanation of how the 'Excessive Quoting Fee' functions or the specific changes being proposed, making it difficult for the average reader to grasp the impact of the rule change.
• Comments are requested from the public, but there is no summary or accessible format provided for non-specialists who might not understand the technical language.
• There is a repetition of the URL provided for submitting comments, which might be seen as redundant.
• The document mentions that some information may be redacted, but it does not specify the criteria or guidelines for such redactions.
• The notice indicates that the proposed rule change is designated for immediate effectiveness without providing detailed justification for bypassing the usual comment period before implementation.
• The language is formal and complex, which may not be easily accessible to all stakeholders, particularly those outside the regulatory or financial sectors.