On June 11, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission proposed rescinding Rule 611 of Regulation NMS, commonly known as the Trade-Through Rule. The proposal represents the…
On June 11, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission proposed rescinding Rule 611 of Regulation NMS, commonly known as the Trade-Through Rule. The proposal represents the most substantial reconsideration of the Regulation NMS framework since its adoption in 2005 and signals a meaningful shift in the Commission's approach to prescriptive equity market structure regulation. For broker-dealers, exchanges, and institutional investors, the proposal carries direct implications for order routing protocols, best execution analyses, and compliance infrastructures developed over the past two decades.
In addition to the proposed rescission of Rule 611, the SEC has proposed rescinding Rule 610(e), which addresses locked and crossed markets. Taken together, these proposals suggest a broader retreat from the prescriptive market structure mandates that have defined U.S. equity trading since 2005. If adopted, market participants would no longer be required to comply with the trade-through protections and locked-market prohibitions that currently shape routing decisions, internalization practices, and inter-market connectivity arrangements.
The Commission also extended the compliance date for the 2024 Regulation NMS amendments concerning minimum pricing increments and access fee caps. Implementation has been moved from November 2026 to November 2027, providing market participants an additional year to prepare for the revised tick size regime and reduced access fee thresholds. The extension acknowledges the significant operational, technological, and supervisory work required to accommodate those changes alongside any restructuring that may follow from the broader rollback proposals.
Affected firms should begin assessing the potential consequences across multiple compliance functions. Order routing logic, smart order router configurations, internal best execution committees, written supervisory procedures, and disclosures to institutional clients may all require reevaluation. Exchanges and alternative trading systems should likewise consider how rule changes could affect connectivity obligations, displayed liquidity incentives, and competitive positioning. Firms may also wish to participate in the rulemaking process through public comment, as the proposals remain subject to revision before any final action.
This update is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Clients should consult counsel for guidance tailored to their specific circumstances, business models, and regulatory obligations.