Document ID: SEC-2023-0111-0001
Agency: sec
Document Type: Notice
Title: Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Cboe Exchange, Inc.
Posted Date: 2023-01-30T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 19 (Monday, January 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5934-5938]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01744]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96742; File No. SR-CBOE-2023-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Update 
Its Fees Schedule

January 24, 2023.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given 
that on January 17, 2023, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or 
``Cboe Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(the ``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 update 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 (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), 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 in connection with 
certain surcharges, the S&P 500 Index (``SPX'') options and SPX weekly 
(``SPXW'') options Lead Market Maker (``LMM'') Incentive Programs, and 
footnote 49 related to transaction fees in Mini-SPX Index (``XSP'') 
options.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee changes on 
January 3, 2023 (SR-CBOE-2023-003). On January 17, 2023, the 
Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange proposes to increase the Index License 
Surcharge applicable to orders executed MSCI Emerging Markets Index 
(``MXEF'') options and MSCI EAFE Index (``MXEA'') options 
(collectively, ``MSCI options'') in Rate Table--All Products Excluding 
Underlying Symbol List and to orders executed in A SPX (including SPXW) 
options in Rate Table--Underlying Symbol List A. Specifically, the 
Exchange currently assesses an Index License Surcharge fee of $0.18 per 
contract for non-Customer orders executed in SPX/SPXW and an Index 
License Surcharge of $0.12 per contract for non-Customer orders 
executed in MSCI options. The proposed rule change increases the Index 
License Surcharge fee applicable to orders executed in SPX/SPXW from 
$0.18 per contract to $0.20 per contract and the Index License 
Surcharge fee applicable to orders executed in MSCI options from $0.12 
to $0.15. The Exchange notes that the Index License Surcharge fees in 
place for SPX/SPXW and MSCI options are designed to recoup some of the 
costs associated with the licenses for these indexes.\4\ The cost of 
the license however still works out to more than the current SPX/SPXW 
and MSCI Index License Surcharge fees and the Exchange therefore 
proposes changes to the current Index License Surcharge fees for SPX/
SPXW and MSCI options in order to continue to offset some of the costs 
associated with the licenses for these indexes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Release Nos. 74854 (April 30, 2015), 
80 FR 26124 (May 6, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-041); and 74422 (March 4, 
2015), 80 FR 12680 (March 10, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to next adopt a Floor Broker Solicitation 
Surcharge Fee in Rate Table--Underlying Symbol List A of the Fees 
Schedule. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to assess $0.15 per 
contract which would apply to solicited SPX and SPXW orders where one 
side is a Customer and both

[[Page 5935]]

sides are crossed in open outcry by the same Floor Broker (i.e., the 
executing Floor Broker acronym is the same on both the buy and sell 
side of the order). The surcharge fee will be assessed to the EFID of 
the buy (sell) side contra to the Customer sell (buy) side of the 
order. The proposed surcharge fee will not apply to customer-to-
customer orders, facilitation orders, solicited orders executed as part 
of a box or jelly roll strategy or as a FLEX transaction. 
``Facilitation orders'' for this purpose are defined as any order in 
which a Clearing Trading Permit Holder (``F'' capacity code) or Non-
Trading Permit Holder Affiliate (``L'' capacity code) is contra to any 
other origin code, provided the same executing broker and clearing firm 
are on both sides of the transaction for open outcry following any 
post-trade changes made on the trade date. The proposed rule change 
appends footnote 40 to the line item containing the proposed Floor 
Broker Solicitation Surcharge Fee. Proposed footnote 40 will describe 
the proposed surcharge and exceptions. Over the past year, the Exchange 
has observed an increase in solicitations in SPX/SPXW by Floor Brokers 
in open outcry. A solicited order represented by a Floor Broker may 
receive certain participation advantages, including priority status.\5\ 
Additionally, the Exchange notes that solicited orders represented by a 
Floor Broker may originate from off-floor participants, who do not pay 
for a Floor Permit or other floor related facility fees as on-floor 
participants do. The proposed surcharge fee therefore only applies to 
solicited orders as to not discourage non-solicited participants on the 
trading floor from continuing to submit bids and offers in response to 
orders represented by Floor Brokers on the trading floor. As such, the 
proposed surcharge fee aims to balance incentives between the provision 
of solicited orders via a Floor Broker, which may originate from off-
floor participants, and the provision of non-solicited responses 
originating from market participants on the trading floor, which the 
Exchange believes will maintain robust hybrid markets and continue to 
incentivize the provision of liquidity to its trading floor environment 
in order to support price discovery and increased execution 
opportunities in SPX/SPXW on the Exchange's trading floor to the 
benefit of all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As of January 3, 2023, the open outcry entitlement for 
solicitations in SPX and SPX is 40% in accordance with Exchange Rule 
5.87(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange proposes to amend its SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive 
Programs during the Global Trading Hours (``GTH'') session. In 
particular, the Exchange offers, among other LMM incentive programs, a 
GTH1 SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive Program that applies during GTH from 7:15 
p.m. CST to 2:00 a.m. CST (``GTH1'') and a GTH2 SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive 
Program that apply during GTH from 2:00 a.m. CST to 8:15 a.m. CST 
(``GTH2''). The Exchange notes that these LMM incentive programs in the 
Fees Schedule provide a rebate to Trading Permit Holders (``TPHs'') 
with LMM appointments that meet certain quoting standards in SPX/SPXW 
in a month during GTH. The Exchange notes that meeting or exceeding the 
quoting standards in SPX/SPXW to receive the applicable rebates (as 
currently offered and as proposed; described in further detail below) 
is optional for an LMM appointed to one of the SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive 
Programs. Rather, an LMM appointed to an incentive program is eligible 
to receive the corresponding rebate if it satisfies the applicable 
quoting standards (as currently offered and as proposed; described in 
further detail below), which the Exchange believes encourages an LMM to 
provide liquidity in the applicable program's products during GTH. The 
Exchange may consider other exceptions to the program's quoting 
standards based on demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or 
other mitigating circumstances. In calculating whether an LMM appointed 
to a GTH1 SPX/SPXW or GTH2 SPX/SPXW 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 series.
    Currently, an LMM appointed to one of the GTH SPX/SPXW LMM 
Incentive Programs must provide continuous electronic quotes during 
GTH1 or GTH2, as applicable, that meet or exceed the quoting standards 
set forth in the Fees Schedule in at least 85% of each of the SPX and 
SPXW series, 90% of the time in a given month, in order to receive a 
rebate for that month in the amount of $15,000 for SPX and $35,000 for 
SPXW (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) for that month. The Exchange now proposes to combine the quoting 
requirements for SPX and SPXW and provide a single, instead of 
separate, rebate for meeting or exceeding the quoting standards. 
Specifically, in order to receive the proposed rebate during GTH1 and/
or GTH2, an LMM no longer must meet the quoting standards in each of 
SPX and SPXW, but rather meet the quoting standard across both classes. 
As proposed, the SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive Program would provide a rebate 
of $40,000 to LMMs that meet the quoting standards during GTH1 and/or 
GTH2 in the collective SPX and SPXW series. The Exchange notes that no 
changes are being made to the quoting standards under the GTH1 or GTH2 
SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive Program.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to delete Footnote 49 from the Fees 
Schedule. Currently, pursuant to Footnote 49, transaction fees for 
Market-Maker orders in the XSP options are waived through December 31, 
2022. The waiver was designed to encourage additional Market-Maker 
order flow in XSP options during the fourth calendar quarter of 2022. 
Therefore, as the waiver has expired and is no longer applicable, the 
Exchange proposes to remove Footnote 49 from the Fees Schedule.
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.\6\ Specifically, the 
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
section 6(b)(5) \7\ 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) \8\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be 
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, 
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to increase the amount 
of the Index License Surcharge fees for orders in SPX/SPXW and MSCI 
options as the proposed increases are consistent with the purpose of 
such surcharge fees as they are intended to continue to help recoup 
some of the costs associated with

[[Page 5936]]

the license for such products in light of recently renewed license 
arrangements between the Exchange and the applicable index providers. 
The proposed Index License Surcharge fees are also equitable and not 
unfairly discriminatory because the surcharge fees will continue to be 
assessed uniformly for all non-Customer orders in SPX/SPXW and MSCI 
options.
    The Exchange believes the proposed Floor Broker Solicitation 
Surcharge Fee is equitable and reasonable. The proposed surcharge fee 
is within the range of the existing surcharge fees in place for various 
orders in SPX/SPXW.\9\ Further, as described above, the Exchange 
believes that the proposed surcharge fee is reasonably designed to not 
discourage non-solicited market participants on the Exchange's trading 
floor from continuing to provide bids and offers in response to orders 
represented by Floor Brokers, particularly in light of the recent 
influx of solicited order executions (which are represented by Floor 
Brokers and may originate from off-floor participants) in SPX/SPXW in 
open outcry. More specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed 
change is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as 
solicited orders represented by Floor Brokers may receive certain 
participation advantages, including priority status that non-solicited 
market participants on the Exchange's trading floor do not.\10\ 
Additionally, as noted above, solicited orders represented by a Floor 
Broker may originate from off-floor participants, who do not pay for a 
Floor Permit or other floor related facility fees as on-floor 
participants do. The Exchange believes that the proposed surcharge fee 
will therefore not preclude economic opportunities for non-solicited 
participants on the trading floor to continue to, and potentially 
increase, bids and offers in response to SPX/SPXW orders represented by 
a Floor Broker. As such, the proposed surcharge fee aims to balance 
incentives between the provision of solicited orders and the provision 
of non-solicited responses originating from market participants on the 
trading floor, which the Exchange believes will maintain robust hybrid 
markets and continue to encourage the provision of liquidity, execution 
opportunities, and improved pricing opportunities in SPX/SPXW on the 
Exchange's trading floor to the benefit of all market participants. The 
Exchange notes that it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory to not assess the proposed surcharge fee to solicited 
customer-to-customer orders, facilitation orders, or solicited orders 
that are executed as part of a box or jelly roll strategy or as a FLEX 
transaction (pursuant to proposed footnote 40). The Exchange notes that 
with respect to not assessing the proposed surcharge to Customer-to-
Customer orders, there is a history in the options markets of providing 
preferential treatment to customers and customer order flow attracts 
additional liquidity to the Exchange, providing market participants 
with more trading opportunities and signaling an increase in Market-
Maker activity, which facilitates tighter spreads. This may cause an 
additional corresponding increase in order flow from other market 
participants, contributing overall towards a robust and well-balanced 
market ecosystem. The Exchange believes it's equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory to exclude solicitation orders executed as part of a box 
or jelly roll strategy or as a FLEX transaction as such orders do not 
generally receive the same participant advantages as solicited orders 
that are not otherwise a part of complex strategies and FLEX 
transactions. Further, the Exchange does not wish to discourage the 
user of such orders. The Exchange also believes its equitable and not 
unfairly discriminatory to exclude facilitation orders as the Exchange 
recognizes that Firms are acting as important sources of liquidity in 
these instances by facilitating their own customers' trading activity 
and the Exchange does not wish to assess such orders an additional 
surcharge. The Exchange believes the proposed surcharge fee generally 
is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as the proposed surcharge 
fee will otherwise apply uniformly to all solicited orders in SPX/SPXW 
where one side is a Customer and where the order was represented by the 
same Floor Broker and executed in open outcry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See e.g., Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Rate Tables.
    \10\ As of January 3, 2023, the open outcry entitlement for 
solicitations in SPX and SPX is 40% in accordance with Exchange Rule 
5.87(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive Programs, 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 programs, because it 
benefits all market participants trading in SPX/SPXW during GTH. These 
incentive programs encourage LMMs appointed to such programs to satisfy 
the applicable 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 SPX/SPXW options, 
which can lead to increased volume, providing for robust markets. The 
Exchange ultimately offers the LMM Incentive Programs, as amended, to 
sufficiently incentivize LMMs appointed to the programs to provide key 
liquidity and active markets in the program's products during the 
corresponding trading sessions. The Exchange believes that these 
incentive programs, as amended, will continue to encourage increased 
quoting to add liquidity in SPX and SPXW during GTH, 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).
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to the rebates under 
the SPX/SPXW GTH LMM Programs is reasonable as a SPX GTH LMMs will 
still be eligible to receive the proposed financial payment (albeit at 
a slightly lesser amount and across both SPX and SPXW). The Exchange 
believes that, even as amended, the SPX/SPXW GTH LMM Incentive Programs 
are reasonably designed to incentivize an appointed LMM to meet the 
applicable quoting standards for SPX/SPXW options during GTH, thereby 
providing liquid and active markets, which facilitates tighter spreads, 
increased trading opportunities, and overall enhanced market quality to 
the benefit of all market participants. Further, the Exchange believes 
the monthly payment continues to be commensurate with the heightened 
quoting standard, even as amended. Further, the Exchange believes the 
proposed rebates applicable to the GTH SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive Programs 
are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they will 
continue to apply equally to any TPH that is appointed as an LMM to the 
GTH1 and GTH2 SPX/SPXW LMM Incentive Program. Additionally, the 
Exchange notes if an LMM appointed to either of the GTH SPX/SPXW LMM 
Incentive Programs does not satisfy the corresponding quoting standards 
for any given month, then it simply will not receive the rebate offered 
by the program for that month.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to eliminate 
the waiver for Market-Maker XSP orders executed during GTH is 
reasonable as

[[Page 5937]]

the waiver is no longer applicable and was set to expire on December 
31, 2022. Eliminating the now obsolete waiver language from the Fees 
Schedule avoids potential confusion. The proposed change is also 
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as it applies uniformly to 
all Market-Makers.

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 changes in connection with License Index 
Surcharges fees will impose any burden on intramarket competition 
because each applies uniformly to all similarly situated TPHs in a 
uniform manner (i.e., to all non-Customer executions in SPX/SPXW or 
MSCI options). The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule 
changes in connection with the Floor Broker Solicitation Surcharge will 
impose any burden on intramarket competition because it applies 
uniformly to all similarly situated market participants in a uniform 
manner. Additionally, the proposed changes to the existing GTH SPX/SPXW 
LMM Incentive Programs will apply to all LMMs appointed to the either 
of the programs in a uniform manner. To the extent these LMMs appointed 
to an incentive program receive a benefit that other market 
participants do not, as stated, these LMMs in their role as Mark-Makers 
on the Exchange have different obligations and are held to different 
standards. For example, Market-Makers play a crucial role in providing 
active and liquid markets in their appointed products, thereby 
providing a robust market which benefits all market participants. Such 
Market-Makers also have obligations and regulatory requirements that 
other participants do not have. The Exchange also notes that an LMM 
appointed to an incentive program may undertake added costs each month 
that it needs to satisfy that heightened quoting standards (e.g., 
having to purchase additional logical connectivity). The Exchange also 
notes that the incentive programs 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. Finally, 
the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change to remove 
Footnote 49 will impose any burden on intramarket competition because 
it simply removes a reference to a waiver that is expired and thus no 
longer applicable.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will 
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or 
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the 
proposed amendments to the surcharges, LMM Incentive Programs, and 
standard applicable transaction fees for XSP during GTH apply only to 
Exchange proprietary products, which are traded exclusively on Cboe 
Options.
    Additionally, 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 15 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 19% of the market share.\11\ 
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.'' \12\ 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'. . . .''.\13\ 
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Volume Summary, 
Month-to-Date (December 20, 2022), available at https://www.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \13\ 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 \14\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \15\ 
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 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

     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-CBOE-2023-007 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.

[[Page 5938]]

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2023-007. 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 the filing also will be available for inspection 
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-CBOE-2023-007 and should be submitted on 
or before February 21, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-01744 Filed 1-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P