[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 243 (Monday, December 22, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59892-59894]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-23522]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-104427; File No. SR-PHLX-2025-72]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing 
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt PHLX 
Options 9, Section 25 To Codify an Options Unbundling Rule

December 17, 2025.
    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 December 11, 2025, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``PHLX'' or ``Exchange'') filed 
with the Securities

[[Page 59893]]

and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule 
change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have 
been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice 
to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested 
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to adopt PHLX Options 9, Section 25 to codify 
the Exchange's longstanding guidance that the unbundling of orders for 
any purpose other than best execution is considered conduct 
inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade, and to remove 
extraneous and nonsensical rule text from PHLX Options 3, Section 7.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's 
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rulefilings, 
and at the principal office of the Exchange.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend PHLX Options 9 by adding a new 
Section 25 to codify its longstanding guidance that it shall be 
considered conduct inconsistent with just and equitable principles of 
trade for any member, member organization, or person associated with or 
employed by a member or member organization (collectively, ``member'' 
or ``members'') to split an order into multiple smaller orders for any 
purpose other than seeking the best execution of the entire order. 
Members of the Exchange are not allowed to engage in conduct 
inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See PHLX General 9, Section 1(c)(1) (``A member, member 
organization, or person associated with or employed by a member or 
member organization shall not engage in conduct inconsistent with 
just and equitable principles of trade.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ``Unbundling,'' also known as ``trade shredding,'' is the practice 
of breaking up an order into multiple smaller orders for some purpose 
other than the best execution of the order. The practice of unbundling 
has in the past been used for purposes such as improperly maximizing 
commissions and fees charged to customers, distorting trade data, or 
circumventing rules pertaining to maximum order size.\4\ For example, 
the unbundling of a large order into several smaller orders could be 
done for the purpose of achieving the Lead Market Maker (LMM) 
allocation preference for orders of 5 contracts or fewer.\5\ 
Alternatively, unbundling an order into separate orders could be done 
for the purpose of gaining a higher allocation percentage in a price-
improvement auction than the member submitting the orders into a price-
improvement auction otherwise would have received.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62667 (Aug. 
9, 2010), 75 FR 50013 (Aug. 16, 2010) (File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2010-77) 
(Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Amex, Inc.; Notice of Filing 
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 
995NY).
    \5\ See PHLX Options 3, Section 10(a)(1)(C).
    \6\ See PHLX Options 3, Section 13(e) (Stating, in part, that 
``[i]t will also be deemed conduct inconsistent with just and 
equitable principles of trade and a violation of General 9, Section 
1(c) to engage in a pattern of conduct where the Initiating Member 
breaks up a PIXL Order into separate orders for the purpose of 
gaining a higher allocation percentage than the Initiating Member 
would have otherwise received in accordance with the allocation 
procedures contained in subparagraph (b)(5) above.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the unbundling of orders generally 
serves no purpose to the customer that entered the order and may cause 
unnecessary delays in the execution of that order. This belief has been 
reflected in the Exchange's longstanding regulatory guidance to its 
members.\7\ It is also reflected in PHLX General 9, Section 1(c)(3), 
concerning the unbundling of equity securities orders.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Options Regulatory Alert #2025-34 (Aug. 29, 2025), 
available at https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/MicroNews.aspx?id=ORA2025-34; Options Regulatory Alert #2016-6 (Feb. 17, 2016), available at 
https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/MicroNews.aspx?id=ORA2016-6; and 
Options Regulatory Alert #2016-4 (Jan. 22, 2016), available at 
https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/MicroNews.aspx?id=ORA2016-4.
    \8\ That rule states that ``it is conduct inconsistent with just 
and equitable principles of trade for any member, member 
organization, or person associated with or employed by a member or 
member organization to engage in conduct that has the intent or 
effect of unbundling equity securities orders for execution for the 
primary purpose of maximizing a monetary or in-kind amount received 
by the member, member organization, or person associated with or 
employed by a member or member organization as a result of the 
execution of such equity securities orders. For purposes of this 
section, `monetary or in-kind amounts' shall be defined to include 
commissions, gratuities, payments for or rebate of fees resulting 
from the entry of such equity securities orders, or any similar 
payments of value to the member, member organization, or person 
associated with or employed by a member or member organization.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The impermissibility of unbundling is a well-established principle 
across the U.S. securities markets. Other options exchanges have anti-
unbundling rules or rule interpretations that are similar to the rule 
being adopted by the Exchange.\9\ Additionally, other exchanges have 
also issued regulatory guidance to their members warning them against 
the practice of unbundling.\10\ Finally, the Financial Industry 
Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') also has its own anti-unbundling rule, 
FINRA Rule 5290, which specifies, in part, that ``[n]o member . . . 
shall engage in conduct that has the intent or effect of splitting any 
order into multiple smaller orders for execution or any execution into 
multiple smaller executions for transaction reporting for the primary 
purpose of maximizing a monetary or in-kind amount to be received by 
the member . . . as a result of the execution of such orders or the 
transaction reporting of such executions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, e.g., NYSE American Rule 995NY(d) (``It shall be 
considered conduct inconsistent with just and equitable principles 
of trade for an ATP Holder to split an order into multiple smaller 
orders for any purpose other than seeking the best execution of the 
entire order.''), NYSE Arca Rule 11.2(g) (``An ETP Holder may not 
split any order into multiple orders for any purpose other than 
seeking the best execution of the entire order.''), and MIAX Chapter 
III, Rule 301, Interpretation .03 (``It shall be considered conduct 
inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade and a 
violation of Rule 301 for a Member to split an order into multiple 
smaller orders for any purpose other than seeking the best execution 
of the entire order.'').
    \10\ See, e.g., Cboe Regulatory Circular RG-15-011 (Sept. 23, 
2015) (``Please note that unbundling of orders greater than 5 
contracts into 1 to 5 lot increments for the purpose of achieving 
small order preference in favor of any [Designated Primary Market-
Maker] or [Lead Market-Maker] may be a violation of CBOE Rule 4.1, 
Just and Equitable Principles of Trade''), available at https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/regulation/circulars/regulatory/RG15-130.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to remove from PHLX Option 3, 
Section 7 the following sentence: ``Orders may not be unbundled, nor 
may a firm solicit a customer to unbundle an order for this purpose.'' 
\11\ This sentence appears

[[Page 59894]]

extraneous, as it does not seem to belong with the preceding sentence 
(``The Exchange may determine to make certain order types and time-in-
force, respectively, on a class or System basis.''). The sentence is 
also nonsensical, as it is not at all clear what it refers to by ``for 
this purpose.'' The Exchange suspects that this rule text may be a 
vestigial remain of some older Exchange rule that has since been 
modified so much as to make this sentence nonsensical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ This sentence was placed in its current location in 2024 as 
part of a larger reorganization of the Exchange's rulebook. The 
sentence used to be located in Option 3, Section 7(f) as a 
standalone provision. The Exchange now believes that, even in its 
former location, this rule text was extraneous and nonsensical and 
should have been removed instead of relocated in that prior filing. 
See Securities Exchange Act No. 101989 (Dec. 19, 2024), 89 FR 106888 
(Dec. 30, 2024) (File No. SR-PHLX-2024-71) (Self-Regulatory 
Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate 
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Various PHLX Rules in 
Connection With a Technology Migration).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 
6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 
6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ in particular, in that it is designed to 
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments 
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national 
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public 
interest, by deterring and helping to prevent the distortive practice 
of unbundling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the unbundling of orders generally 
serves no purpose to the customer that entered the order and may cause 
unnecessary delays in the execution of that order. Codifying its 
longstanding guidance in its rulebook that unbundling is conduct 
inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade is thus 
designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade. 
Additionally, by defining unbundling as the practice of splitting an 
order into multiple smaller orders for any purpose other than seeking 
the best execution of the entire order, the proposal is designed to 
promote best execution and thus protect investors and the public 
interest.
    Additionally, the Exchange reiterates that the proposed rule is 
substantively identical to NYSE American Rule 995NY(d) and it is 
consistent with the rules and regulatory guidance of other exchanges, 
as well as FINRA Rule 5290.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is consistent with the Act 
to remove the extraneous and nonsensical rule text in PHLX Options 3, 
Section 7, as this likely vestigial rule text currently serves no 
purpose and can be confusing to market participants. Removing this rule 
text is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of 
a free and open market and a national market system by making PHLX 
Options 3, Section 7 more internally coherent and clearer to market 
participants.

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. In terms of intra-market 
competition, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule will apply 
equally to all members of the Exchange. Additionally, in terms of 
intermarket competition, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule is 
consistent with the rules of other exchanges, as well as the rules of 
FINRA. Finally, removing the extraneous and nonsensical rule text in 
PHLX Options 3, Section 7 will not impose any burden on competition, as 
it will serve to clarify that rule for all market participants.

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

    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 from the date on which it was filed, or 
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become 
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \14\ and 
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission 
written notice of its intent to file 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. 
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include 
file number SR-PHLX-2025-72 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-PHLX-2025-72. 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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the filing will be available for inspection and 
copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not include 
personal identifiable information in submissions; you should submit 
only information that you wish to make available publicly. We may 
redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted material 
that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All submissions 
should refer to file number SR-PHLX-2025-72 and should be submitted on 
or before January 12, 2026.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-23522 Filed 12-19-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P