Notice2023-15270
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend its Fees Schedule
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 19, 2023
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 137 (Wednesday, July 19, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 19, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46315-46320]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15270]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-97902; File No. SR-CBOE-2023-033]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
its Fees Schedule
July 13, 2023.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
[[Page 46316]]
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 30, 2023, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``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
Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (<a href="http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx">http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx</a>), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, 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 proposes to amend its Fees Schedule, effective July 3,
2023.
XSP Fees
The Exchange first proposes to adopt and amend certain fees related
to transactions in Mini-SPX Index (``XSP'') options. Specifically, the
proposed rule changes amends and adopts certain fees for XSP in the
Rate Table for All Products Underlying Symbol List A, as follows:
<bullet> Amends fee code XC, appended to all Customer (capacity
``C'') orders in XSP that are for less than 10 contracts and assesses
no charge, to provide a rebate of $0.13 per contract.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Exchange also proposes to update corresponding Footnote
9 to reflect Customer orders in XSP for less than 10 contracts will
receive a rebate (instead of no charge).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<bullet> Amends fee code CC, appended to all Customer (capacity
``C'') orders in XSP that are for greater than or equal to 10 contracts
and assesses a fee of $0.04 per contract, to assess a fee of $0.07 per
contract.
<bullet> Adopts fee code MC, appended to all Market-Maker (capacity
``M'') orders in XSP that are contra customer and assesses a fee of
$0.15 per contract.
<bullet> Amends fee code MX, currently appended to all Market-Maker
(capacity ``M'') orders in XSP and assesses a fee of $0.045, to apply
to orders contra to non-customers and to assess a fee of $0.09 per
contract.
<bullet> Amends fee code XF, appended to all Clearing Trading
Permit Holders (``TPHs'') (capacity ``F'') and Non-Clearing TPH
Affiliates (capacity ``L'') (collectively, ``Firms'') orders in XSP and
assesses a fee of $0.06, to assess a fee of $0.13 per contract.
<bullet> Amends fee code XB, appended to all Broker-Dealer
(capacity ``B''), Joint Back-Office (capacity ``J''), Non-TPH Market-
Maker (capacity ``N''), and Professional (capacity ``U'')
(collectively, ``Non-Customers'') orders in XSP and assesses a fee of
$0.08 per contract, to assess a fee of $0.17 per contract.
Customer Volume Incentive Program
The Exchange proposes to amend the Customer Volume Incentive
Program (``VIP''). The Exchange first notes that it operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
direct order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More
specifically, the Exchange is only one of 16 options venues to which
market participants may direct their order flow. Based on publicly
available information, no single options exchange has more than 17% of
the market share.\4\ Thus, in such a low-concentrated and highly
competitive market, no single options exchange possesses significant
pricing power in the execution of option order flow. The Exchange
believes that the ever-shifting market share among the exchanges from
month to month demonstrates that market participants can shift order
flow, or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of products,
in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain
the Exchange's transaction fees, and market participants can readily
trade on competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those other
venues to be more favorable. In response to the competitive
environment, the Exchange offers tiered pricing in its Fees Schedule,
like that of other options exchanges fees schedules,\5\ which provides
TPHs opportunities to qualify for higher rebates or reduced fees where
certain volume criteria and thresholds are met. Tiered pricing provides
an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive for higher tier levels,
which provides increasingly higher benefits or discounts for satisfying
increasingly more stringent criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Volume Summary
(June 28, 2023), available at <a href="https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/">https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/</a>.
\5\ See e.g., NASDAQ Stock Market Rules, Options Rules, Options
7 Pricing Schedule, Sec. 2 Options Market--Fees and Rebates, Tiers
1-6; see also NYSE Arca Options, Fees and Charges, Customer Posting
Credit Tiers in Non-Penny Issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, under the VIP, the Exchange credits each TPH the per
contract amount set forth in the VIP table for Public Customer (origin
code ``C'') orders transmitted by TPHs (with certain exceptions) \6\
and executed electronically on the Exchange, provided the TPH meets
certain volume thresholds in a month; volume for Professional Customers
and Voluntary Professionals (``Professional Customers'') (origin code
``W''), Broker-Dealers (origin code ``B''), and Joint Back-Offices
(``JBO'') (origin code ``J'') orders are counted toward reaching such
thresholds.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Footnote 36.
\7\ See Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The VIP offers both rates for Complex and Simple orders. The VIP
provides however, that a TPH will only receive the Complex credit rates
for both its Complex AIM and Non-AIM volume if at least 38% of that
TPH's qualifying VIP volume (in both AIM and Non-AIM) in the previous
month was comprised of Simple volume. If the TPH's previous month's
volume does not meet the 38% Simple volume threshold, then the TPH's
Customer (C) Complex volume will receive credits at the Simple rate
only (i.e., all volume, both Simple and Complex, will receive credits
at the applicable Simple rate). The Exchange proposes to reduce the 38%
threshold to 32%, for Tiers 1, 2, and 3 (the 38% threshold will
continue to apply to Tiers 4 and 5). The proposed change is designed to
increase the amount of volume TPHs provide on the Exchange
[[Page 46317]]
and further encourage them to contribute to a deeper, more liquid
market, as well as to increase transactions and take such execution
opportunities provided by such increased liquidity, while implementing
an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive for the highest level. The
Exchange believes the proposed change will still encourage TPHs to
continue to send both Simple and Complex volume to the Exchange.
Further, the Exchange proposes to increase the VIP credit rates for
complex orders in Tier 3 from $0.24 to $0.23 per contract for non-AIM
volume and from $0.22 to $.021 per contract for AIM volume.
MRUT LMM Incentive Program
Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend its Mini-Russell 2000 Index
option (``MRUT'') Lead Market-Maker (``LMM'') Incentive Program. The
Exchange offers several LMM Incentive Programs which provide a rebate
to TPHs with LMM appointments to the respective incentive program that
meet certain quoting standards in the applicable series in a month. The
Exchange notes that meeting or exceeding the quoting standards (both
current and as proposed; described in further detail below) in each of
the LMM Incentive Program products to receive the applicable rebate
(both currently offered and as proposed; described in further detail
below) is optional for an LMM appointed to a program. Particularly, an
LMM appointed to an incentive program is eligible to receive the
corresponding rebate if it satisfies the applicable quoting standards,
which the Exchange believes encourages appointed LMMs to provide
liquidity in the applicable class and trading session (i.e., Regular
Trading Hours (``RTH'') or Global Trading Hours). The Exchange may
consider other exceptions to the programs' quoting standards based on
demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or other mitigating
circumstances. In calculating whether an LMM appointed to an incentive
program meets the applicable program's quoting standards each month,
the Exchange excludes from the calculation in that month the business
day in which the LMM missed meeting or exceeding the quoting standards
in the highest number of the applicable series.
The Exchange proposes to amend the current MRUT LMM Incentive
Program. Currently, the MRUT LMM Incentive Program provides that, for
MRUT, if the appointed LMM provides continuous electronic quotes during
RTH that meet or exceed the heightened quoting standards in at least
99% of the MRUT series 90% of the time in a given month, the LMM will
receive a rebate for that month in the amount of $15,000 (or pro-rated
amount if an appointment begins after the first trading day of the
month or ends prior to the last trading day of the month). The Exchange
now proposes to amend the series qualification requirement for the MRUT
LMM Incentive Program. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to update
the series qualification requirement to require the appointed LMM to
provide continuous electronic quotes during RTH that meet or exceed the
heightened quoting standards in at least 97% the MRUT series 90% of the
time in a given month in order to receive the rebate, thereby
decreasing the series qualification requirement by 2%. In changing this
requirement, the Exchange wishes to encourage LMMs appointed to the
MRUT LMM Incentive Program to provide significant liquidity in MRUT
options by meeting the series qualification requirements (and relevant
quoting standards) under the Program in order to receive the rebate.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\8\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \9\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, 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. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \10\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\11\ which
requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its TPHs and other
persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\10\ Id.
\11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed fees for Customer, Market-
Maker, Firm and Non-Customer orders in XSP are reasonable, equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange notes that the proposed
transactions fees for Customer orders in XSP that are for more than 10
contracts, as well as for Market-Maker, Firm and Non-Customer orders in
XSP, remain lower than that of the similar market participant fees
associated with other index products.\12\ Further, the Exchange
believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
provide a rebate of $0.13 for all Customer orders in XSP that are for
less than 10 contracts, as such rebate is designed to incentivize
Customer volume in XSP on the Exchange. Additionally, the Exchange
believes it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to establish a
fee structure for Market-Maker orders in XSP, based on contra-party,
and to adopt a new fee code specific to Market-Maker orders in XSP that
are contra customer, as such changes are also designed to incentivize
an increase in Customer volume in XSP on the Exchange. The Exchange
believes that incentivizing more Customer orders in XSP will create
more trading opportunities, which, in turn attracts Market-Makers. A
resulting increase in Market-Maker activity facilitates tighter
spreads, which may lead to additional increase of order flow in XSP
from other market participants, further contributing to a deeper, more
liquid market to the benefit of all market participants by creating a
more robust and well-balanced market ecosystem. Further, the Exchange
believes that the changes are reasonable and that the fees, even as
amended, will continue to incentivize Members to send additional
Market-Maker orders to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Cboe Options Fee Schedule, ``Index Options Rate Table--
All Index Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A and Sector
Indexes''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that the proposed fees for Customer, Market-
Maker, Firm and Non-Customer orders in XSP are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the proposed fees will apply
automatically and uniformly to all Customer, Market-Maker, Firm and
Non-Customer orders in XSP.
The Exchange believes the proposed amendment to the VIP, to
decrease the percentage of TPH qualifying VIP volume (in both AIM and
Non-AIM) that must be comprised of Simple volume in
[[Page 46318]]
order to receive the complex rates for both Complex AIM and Non-AIM
volume for Tiers 1 through 3, is reasonable because it makes it
slightly easier for TPHs to meet the qualifying criteria to receive the
Complex credits in Tiers 1 through 3. The Exchange notes that the VIP
will continue to provide an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive
for the highest tier level, which provides increasingly higher credits,
for both Complex and Simple volume. The Exchange believes the proposed
change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
proposed changes apply to all TPHs uniformly.
Further, the Exchange believes that decreasing the VIP credit rates
for complex orders in Tier 3 is reasonable because it will still allow
all TPHs transmitting public customer complex orders that reach the
Tier 3 volume thresholds to receive a credit for doing so (albeit at
slightly lower amounts). The proposed complex credit rates for Tier 3
also do not represent a significant departure from the credit rates
offered under the existing Tier 3 and are therefore still reasonable
based on the difficulty of satisfying the tier's criteria and ensures
the proposed credit rates, along with the existing threshold,
appropriately reflect the incremental difficulty to achieve VIP Tier 3.
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the VIP are
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory, as such changes
should continue to incentivize the sending of more complex orders to
the Exchange. This should provide greater liquidity and trading
opportunities, including for market participants who send simple orders
to the Exchange (as simple orders can trade with the legs of complex
orders). The greater liquidity and trading opportunities should benefit
not just public customers (whose orders are the only ones that qualify
for the VIP) but all market participants.
The Exchange believes that the proposal represents an equitable
allocation of rebates and is not unfairly discriminatory because all
TPHs have the opportunity to meet the proposed Simple volume thresholds
in Tiers 1 through 3, to receive the complex rates for both Complex AIM
and Non-AIM volume for Tiers 1 through 3. Given that TPHs change their
trading strategies and patterns month-to-month to align with changing
market trends and conditions, as well as pricing and functionality
changes across other exchanges, and without having a view of activity
on other markets and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of
knowing whether this proposed rule change would definitively result in
a shift of TPHs qualifying for the proposed tiers. While the Exchange
has no way of predicting with certainty how the rule change will impact
TPHs, the Exchange anticipates the impact of the proposed change to be
minimal in at least one TPH will be able to reach Tier 2, as amended,
and two TPHs will be able to reach Tier 3, as amended. As stated, the
Exchange believes that the proposed changes do not represent a
significant departure from the current required criteria, is still
reasonable based on the difficulty of satisfying each tier's criteria,
and is appropriately aligned with the incremental difficulty to achieve
the existing VIP tiers. As such, the Exchange does not anticipate the
proposed change to impact the number of firms that compete across all
tiers, but instead encourages competition by encouraging an increase in
order flow in order to qualify for contract credits. Therefore, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes are unfairly
discriminatory as it would not impact the range of typical competition
across such tiers.
The Exchange believes it is reasonable to decrease the series
requirement for the MRUT LMM Incentive Program to 97% (from 99%), as
such changes are reasonably designed to slightly ease the difficulty in
meeting the heightened quoting standards offered under these programs
(for which an appointed LMM receives the respective rebates), which, in
turn, provides increased incentive for LMMs appointed to these programs
to provide significant liquidity in MRUT options. Such liquidity
benefits all market participants by providing more trading
opportunities, tighter spreads, and added market transparency and price
discovery, and signals to other market participants to direct their
order flow to those markets, thereby contributing to robust levels of
liquidity.
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the LMM
Incentive Program is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. The
Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
to amend the series qualification requirement for the MRUT LMM
Incentive Program, because such series qualification requirement will
equally apply to any and all TPHs with LMM appointments to the MRUT LMM
Incentive Program that seek to meet the program's heightened quoting
standard in order to receive the rebate offered under the program. The
Exchange additionally notes that, if an LMM appointed to the LMM
Incentive Program does not satisfy the corresponding heightened quoting
standard for any given month, then it simply will not receive the
rebate offered by the respective program for that month.
Regarding the MRUT LMM Incentive Program generally, the Exchange
believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
continue to offer these financial incentives, including as amended, to
LMMs appointed to the program, because it benefits all market
participants trading in MRUT options during RTH. This incentive program
encourages the LMMs appointed to such program to satisfy the heightened
quoting standards, which may increase liquidity and provide more
trading opportunities and tighter spreads. Indeed, the Exchange notes
that these LMMs serve a crucial role in providing quotes and the
opportunity for market participants to trade MRUT options, as
applicable, which can lead to increased volume, providing for robust
markets. The Exchange ultimately offers the LMM Incentive Program, as
amended, to sufficiently incentivize LMMs appointed to the incentive
program to provide key liquidity and active markets in the
corresponding program products during the corresponding trading
sessions, and believes that these incentive program, as amended, will
continue to encourage increased quoting to add liquidity in MRUT,
thereby protecting investors and the public interest. The Exchange also
notes that an LMM appointed to an incentive program may undertake added
costs each month to satisfy that heightened quoting standards (e.g.,
having to purchase additional logical connectivity).
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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The amendments to XSP fees will
apply to all similarly situated TPHs equally, the VIP will apply to all
TPHs submitting qualified orders equally, and the amendments to the
MRUT LMM Incentive Program will apply uniformly to any LMM appointment
to the programs.
The Exchange believes that providing a rebate of $0.13 for Customer
orders in XSP that are for less than 10 contracts will incentivize
Customer volume in XSP on the Exchange. Further, the
[[Page 46319]]
proposed change to establish a fee structure for Market-Maker orders in
XSP, based on contra-party, and adopt a new fee code specific to
Market-Maker orders in XSP that are contra customer, is designed to
incentivize an increase in Customer volume in XSP on the Exchange. As
noted above, Customer order flow, importantly, provides increased
trading opportunities signaling additional liquidity and ultimately
enhancing overall market quality. Further, preferential pricing to
Customers is a long-standing options industry practice.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See e.g., NYSE American Options Fee Schedule, Section I.A,
Options Transaction Fees and Credits: Rates for Options
transactions; and MIAX Options Fee Schedule, Section (b)(1),
Proprietary Products Exchange Fees: SPIKES, each of which assesses a
lower transaction fee for customer orders than that of other market
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, the Exchange believes the proposed VIP changes
would continue to incentivize the sending of more complex orders to the
Exchange, which in turn would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for all TPHs. The Exchange believes the proposed change to decrease the
percentage of TPH qualifying VIP volume (in both AIM and Non-AIM) that
must be comprised of Simple volume in order to receive the complex
rates for both Complex AIM and Non-AIM volume for Tiers 1 through 3
will continue to provide an incremental incentive for TPHs to strive
for the highest tier level, which provides increasingly higher credits,
for both Complex and Simple volume, thus incentivizing order flow to
the Exchange. Further, the Exchange believes the change to decrease the
VIP credit rates for complex orders in Tier 3 remain in line to the
amounts of credits paid to market participants by another exchange for
similar transactions and do not represent a significant departure from
the credit rates offered under the existing Tier 3.
Finally, in regard to the MRUT LMM Incentive Program, to the extent
LMMs appointed to this programs receive a benefit that other market
participants do not, as stated, these LMMs in their role as Market-
Makers on the Exchange have different obligations and are held to
different standards. An LMM appointed to an incentive program may also
undertake added costs each month to satisfy that heightened quoting
standards (e.g., having to purchase additional logical connectivity).
The Exchange also notes that the proposed changes are designed to
attract additional order flow to the Exchange, wherein greater
liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more trading
opportunities, tighter spreads, and added market transparency and price
discovery, and signals to other market participants to direct their
order flow to those markets, thereby contributing to robust levels of
liquidity.
As a result of the above, the Exchange believes that the proposed
changes furthers the Commission's goal in adopting Regulation NMS of
fostering competition among orders, which promotes ``more efficient
pricing of individual stocks for all types of orders, large and
small.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 70 FR 37495,
37498-99 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
notes that it operates in a highly competitive market. TPHs have
numerous alternative venues that they may participate on and direct
their order flow, including 16 other options exchanges, as well as off-
exchange venues, where competitive products are available for trading.
Based on publicly available information, no single options exchange has
more than 17% of the market share.\15\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of option order flow.
Indeed, participants can readily choose to send their orders to other
exchange, and, additionally off-exchange venues, if they deem fee
levels at those other venues to be more favorable. Moreover, the
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, 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.'' \16\ The fact that this market is
competitive has also 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'. . ..''.\17\ Accordingly, the Exchange
does not believe its proposed fee change imposes any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See supra note 4.
\16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
\17\ 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)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.
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) of the Act \18\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \19\
thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
<bullet> Use the Commission's internet comment form (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>); or
<bullet> Send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bdcfc8d1d890ded2d0d0d8d3c9cefdced8de93dad2cb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bccec9d0d991dfd3d1d1d9d2c8cffccfd9df92dbd3ca">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
file number SR-CBOE-2023-033 on the subject line.
[[Page 46320]]
Paper Comments
<bullet> 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-CBOE-2023-033. 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 (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>). 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal offices 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-CBOE-2023-033, and should be
submitted on or before August 9, 2023.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-15270 Filed 7-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 19, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.