COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND GUARANTEES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2020
COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES, AND GUARANTEES
COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES, AND GUARANTEES	21. COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND GUARANTEES Legal Proceedings As of March 31, 2020, the Company was subject to the various legal proceedings and claims discussed below, as well as certain other legal proceedings and claims that have not been fully resolved and that have arisen in the ordinary course of business. The Company reviews its legal proceedings and claims, regulatory reviews and inspections and other legal proceedings on an ongoing basis and follows appropriate accounting guidance when making accrual and disclosure decisions. The Company establishes accruals for those contingencies where the incurrence of a loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated, and the Company discloses the amount accrued and the amount of a reasonably possible loss in excess of the amount accrued, if such disclosure is necessary for the condensed consolidated financial statements to not be misleading. The Company does not record liabilities when the likelihood that the liability has been incurred is probable, but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated, or when the liability is believed to be only reasonably possible or remote. The Company’s assessment of whether a loss is remote, reasonably possible, or probable is based on its assessment of the ultimate outcome of the matter following all appeals. As of March 31, 2020, the Company does not believe that there is a reasonable possibility that any material loss exceeding the amounts already recognized for these legal proceedings and claims, regulatory reviews, inspections or other legal proceedings, if any, has been incurred. While the consequences of certain unresolved proceedings are not presently determinable, the outcome of any proceeding is inherently uncertain and an adverse outcome from certain matters could have a material effect on the financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of the Company in any given reporting period. Except as set forth herein, there have been no material changes during the period covered by this Form 10-Q from the legal proceedings disclosures in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019. SIFMA Securities Industry Financial Markets Association (“SIFMA”) has filed a number of denial of access applications with the SEC to set aside proposed rule changes to establish or modify fees for Cboe Options, C2, BZX, BYX, EDGX and EDGA (the “Exchanges”) market data products and related services (the “Challenged Fees”). The Challenged Fees were held in abeyance pending a decision, which was issued by the SEC on October 16, 2018, on a separate SIFMA denial of access application regarding fees proposed by Nasdaq and the NYSE for their respective market data products. In a second order entered on October 16, 2018, the SEC issued an order (the “Order”) that remanded the stayed Challenged Fees and ordered the Exchanges to: (i) within six months of the Order, provide notice to the SEC of developed or identified fair procedures for assessing the Challenged Fees (the “Procedures”) and (ii) within one year of the Order, apply the Procedures to the Challenged Fees and submit to the SEC a record explaining the Exchanges’ conclusions. On October 26, 2018, the Exchanges filed a motion to reconsider the Order with the SEC. On November 21, 2018, the Exchanges filed with the SEC a joinder motion to NYSE’s prior motion for stay of the Order. On December 3, 2018, SIFMA filed a response to NYSE’s motion for stay. Nasdaq withdrew its motion to reconsider the Order with the SEC on December 4, 2018, and on December 5, 2018, filed a Petition for Review with the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (the “D.C. Circuit”). On December 14, 2018, the SEC denied the motion for stay but tolled the compliance date set forth in the remand order until ruling is made on the motion to reconsider. The Exchanges and NYSE filed on January 4, 2019 a motion to intervene in the Nasdaq Petition for Review to ensure the ability to participate in the case; the motion to intervene was granted on January 25, 2019. On the same day, SIFMA filed a motion with the D.C. Circuit moving to dismiss or hold in abeyance the Petition for Review. The Exchanges and NYSE submitted on February 6, 2019 a statement of issues for consideration in connection with the Petition for Review pending before the D.C. Circuit. On March 29, 2019, the D.C. Circuit issued an order indicating that SIFMA’s motion to dismiss will be considered with the underlying merits of the Petition for Review. On May 7, 2019, the SEC denied the Exchanges and NYSE’s motion for reconsideration of the Order. The SEC also further tolled the effectiveness of the remand order subject to the resolution of the substantive SIFMA case against Nasdaq and NYSE Arca that is already before the D.C. Circuit. On June 17, 2019, the Exchanges filed a petition for review of the May 7, 2019 SEC order denying reconsideration of the Order with the D.C. Circuit and of the Order. The Exchanges’ joint opening brief was filed on October 23, 2019, the SEC’s response was filed on November 22, 2019, the Exchanges’ joint reply was filed on December 20, 2019 and final briefs were filed on January 10, 2020. Oral arguments were held on February 18, 2020. An adverse ruling in that matter or a subsequent appeal could adversely affect exchange market data fees. However, the Company believes that the claims are without merit and intends to litigate the matter vigorously. The Company is unable to estimate what, if any, liability may result from this litigation. VIX Litigation On March 20, 2018, a putative class action complaint captioned Tomasulo v. Cboe Exchange, Inc., et al., No. 18-cv-02025 was filed in federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois alleging that the Company intentionally designed its products, operated its platforms, and formulated the method for calculating VIX and the Special Opening Quotation, (i.e., the special VIX value designed by the Company and calculated on the settlement date of VIX derivatives prior to the opening of trading), in a manner that could be collusively manipulated by a group of entities named as John Doe defendants. A number of similar putative class actions, some of which do not name the Company as a party, were filed in federal court in Illinois and New York on behalf of investors in certain volatility-related products. On June 14, 2018, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the putative class actions in the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois. On September 28, 2018, plaintiffs filed a master, consolidated complaint that is a putative class action alleging various claims against the Company and John Doe defendants in the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois. The claims asserted against the Company consist of a Securities Exchange Act fraud claim, three Commodity Exchange Act claims and a state law negligence claim. Plaintiffs request a judgment awarding class damages in an unspecified amount, as well as punitive or exemplary damages in an unspecified amount, prejudgment interest, costs including attorneys’ and experts’ fees and expenses and such other relief as the court may deem just and proper. On November 19, 2018, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the master consolidated complaint and the plaintiffs filed their response on January 7, 2019. The Company filed its reply on January 28, 2019. On May 29, 2019, the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois granted the Company’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ entire complaint against the Company. The state law negligence claim was dismissed with prejudice and the other claims were dismissed without prejudice with leave to file an amended complaint, which plaintiffs filed on July 19, 2019. On August 28, 2019, the Company filed its second motion to dismiss the amended consolidated complaint and plaintiffs filed their response on October 8, 2019. On January 27, 2020, the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois granted the Company’s second motion to dismiss and all counts against the Company were dismissed with prejudice. On April 21, 2020, the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois granted plaintiffs’ motion to certify the January 27, 2020 dismissal order for an immediate appeal. The Company currently believes that the claims are without merit and intends to litigate the matter vigorously. The Company is unable to estimate what, if any, liability may result from this litigation. Other As self-regulatory organizations under the jurisdiction of the SEC, Cboe Options, C2, BZX, BYX, EDGX and EDGA are subject to routine reviews and inspections by the SEC. As a designated contract market under the jurisdiction of the CFTC, CFE is subject to routine reviews and inspections by the CFTC. Cboe SEF, LLC is a swap execution facility registered with the CFTC and subject to routine reviews and inspections by the CFTC. Cboe Trading is subject to reviews and inspections by FINRA. The Company has from time to time received inquiries and investigative requests from the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations as well as the Division of Enforcement seeking information about the Company’s compliance with its obligations as a self-regulatory organization, the federal securities laws as well as members’ compliance with the federal securities laws. In addition, while Cboe Europe Limited and Cboe Chi-X Europe have not been the subject of any material litigation or regulatory investigation in the past, there is always the possibility of such action in the future. As both companies are domiciled in the U.K., it is likely that any action would be taken in the U.K. courts in relation to litigation or by the FCA in relation to any regulatory enforcement action. The Company is also currently a party to various other legal proceedings in addition to those already mentioned. Management does not believe that the likely outcome of any of these other reviews, inspections, investigations or other legal proceedings is expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources. See also Note 7 (“Credit Losses”) for information on promissory notes related to the CAT. See also Note 19 (“Income Taxes”). Contractual Obligations See Note 22 (“Leases”) for information on lease obligations.

COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND GUARANTEES

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2020

COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES, AND GUARANTEES

COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES, AND GUARANTEES

21. COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND GUARANTEES

Legal Proceedings

As of March 31, 2020, the Company was subject to the various legal proceedings and claims discussed below, as well as certain other legal proceedings and claims that have not been fully resolved and that have arisen in the ordinary course of business.

The Company reviews its legal proceedings and claims, regulatory reviews and inspections and other legal proceedings on an ongoing basis and follows appropriate accounting guidance when making accrual and disclosure decisions. The Company establishes accruals for those contingencies where the incurrence of a loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated, and the Company discloses the amount accrued and the amount of a reasonably possible loss in excess of the amount accrued, if such disclosure is necessary for the condensed consolidated financial statements to not be misleading. The Company does not record liabilities when the likelihood that the liability has been incurred is probable, but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated, or when the liability is believed to be only reasonably possible or remote. The Company’s assessment of whether a loss is remote, reasonably possible, or probable is based on its assessment of the ultimate outcome of the matter following all appeals.

As of March 31, 2020, the Company does not believe that there is a reasonable possibility that any material loss exceeding the amounts already recognized for these legal proceedings and claims, regulatory reviews, inspections or

other legal proceedings, if any, has been incurred. While the consequences of certain unresolved proceedings are not presently determinable, the outcome of any proceeding is inherently uncertain and an adverse outcome from certain matters could have a material effect on the financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of the Company in any given reporting period.

Except as set forth herein, there have been no material changes during the period covered by this Form 10-Q from the legal proceedings disclosures in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019.

SIFMA

Securities Industry Financial Markets Association (“SIFMA”) has filed a number of denial of access applications with the SEC to set aside proposed rule changes to establish or modify fees for Cboe Options, C2, BZX, BYX, EDGX and EDGA (the “Exchanges”) market data products and related services (the “Challenged Fees”). The Challenged Fees were held in abeyance pending a decision, which was issued by the SEC on October 16, 2018, on a separate SIFMA denial of access application regarding fees proposed by Nasdaq and the NYSE for their respective market data products. In a second order entered on October 16, 2018, the SEC issued an order (the “Order”) that remanded the stayed Challenged Fees and ordered the Exchanges to: (i) within six months of the Order, provide notice to the SEC of developed or identified fair procedures for assessing the Challenged Fees (the “Procedures”) and (ii) within one year of the Order, apply the Procedures to the Challenged Fees and submit to the SEC a record explaining the Exchanges’ conclusions. On October 26, 2018, the Exchanges filed a motion to reconsider the Order with the SEC. On November 21, 2018, the Exchanges filed with the SEC a joinder motion to NYSE’s prior motion for stay of the Order. On December 3, 2018, SIFMA filed a response to NYSE’s motion for stay. Nasdaq withdrew its motion to reconsider the Order with the SEC on December 4, 2018, and on December 5, 2018, filed a Petition for Review with the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (the “D.C. Circuit”). On December 14, 2018, the SEC denied the motion for stay but tolled the compliance date set forth in the remand order until ruling is made on the motion to reconsider. The Exchanges and NYSE filed on January 4, 2019 a motion to intervene in the Nasdaq Petition for Review to ensure the ability to participate in the case; the motion to intervene was granted on January 25, 2019. On the same day, SIFMA filed a motion with the D.C. Circuit moving to dismiss or hold in abeyance the Petition for Review. The Exchanges and NYSE submitted on February 6, 2019 a statement of issues for consideration in connection with the Petition for Review pending before the D.C. Circuit. On March 29, 2019, the D.C. Circuit issued an order indicating that SIFMA’s motion to dismiss will be considered with the underlying merits of the Petition for Review. On May 7, 2019, the SEC denied the Exchanges and NYSE’s motion for reconsideration of the Order. The SEC also further tolled the effectiveness of the remand order subject to the resolution of the substantive SIFMA case against Nasdaq and NYSE Arca that is already before the D.C. Circuit. On June 17, 2019, the Exchanges filed a petition for review of the May 7, 2019 SEC order denying reconsideration of the Order with the D.C. Circuit and of the Order. The Exchanges’ joint opening brief was filed on October 23, 2019, the SEC’s response was filed on November 22, 2019, the Exchanges’ joint reply was filed on December 20, 2019 and final briefs were filed on January 10, 2020. Oral arguments were held on February 18, 2020. An adverse ruling in that matter or a subsequent appeal could adversely affect exchange market data fees. However, the Company believes that the claims are without merit and intends to litigate the matter vigorously. The Company is unable to estimate what, if any, liability may result from this litigation.

VIX Litigation

On March 20, 2018, a putative class action complaint captioned Tomasulo v. Cboe Exchange, Inc., et al., No. 18-cv-02025 was filed in federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois alleging that the Company intentionally designed its products, operated its platforms, and formulated the method for calculating VIX and the Special Opening Quotation, (i.e., the special VIX value designed by the Company and calculated on the settlement date of VIX derivatives prior to the opening of trading), in a manner that could be collusively manipulated by a group of entities named as John Doe defendants. A number of similar putative class actions, some of which do not name the Company as a party, were filed in federal court in Illinois and New York on behalf of investors in certain volatility-related products. On June 14, 2018, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the putative class actions in the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois. On September 28, 2018, plaintiffs filed a master, consolidated complaint that is a putative class action alleging various claims against the Company and John Doe defendants in the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois. The claims asserted against the Company

consist of a Securities Exchange Act fraud claim, three Commodity Exchange Act claims and a state law negligence claim. Plaintiffs request a judgment awarding class damages in an unspecified amount, as well as punitive or exemplary damages in an unspecified amount, prejudgment interest, costs including attorneys’ and experts’ fees and expenses and such other relief as the court may deem just and proper. On November 19, 2018, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the master consolidated complaint and the plaintiffs filed their response on January 7, 2019. The Company filed its reply on January 28, 2019. On May 29, 2019, the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois granted the Company’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ entire complaint against the Company. The state law negligence claim was dismissed with prejudice and the other claims were dismissed without prejudice with leave to file an amended complaint, which plaintiffs filed on July 19, 2019. On August 28, 2019, the Company filed its second motion to dismiss the amended consolidated complaint and plaintiffs filed their response on October 8, 2019. On January 27, 2020, the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois granted the Company’s second motion to dismiss and all counts against the Company were dismissed with prejudice. On April 21, 2020, the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois granted plaintiffs’ motion to certify the January 27, 2020 dismissal order for an immediate appeal. The Company currently believes that the claims are without merit and intends to litigate the matter vigorously. The Company is unable to estimate what, if any, liability may result from this litigation.

Other

As self-regulatory organizations under the jurisdiction of the SEC, Cboe Options, C2, BZX, BYX, EDGX and EDGA are subject to routine reviews and inspections by the SEC. As a designated contract market under the jurisdiction of the CFTC, CFE is subject to routine reviews and inspections by the CFTC. Cboe SEF, LLC is a swap execution facility registered with the CFTC and subject to routine reviews and inspections by the CFTC. Cboe Trading is subject to reviews and inspections by FINRA. The Company has from time to time received inquiries and investigative requests from the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations as well as the Division of Enforcement seeking information about the Company’s compliance with its obligations as a self-regulatory organization, the federal securities laws as well as members’ compliance with the federal securities laws. In addition, while Cboe Europe Limited and Cboe Chi-X Europe have not been the subject of any material litigation or regulatory investigation in the past, there is always the possibility of such action in the future. As both companies are domiciled in the U.K., it is likely that any action would be taken in the U.K. courts in relation to litigation or by the FCA in relation to any regulatory enforcement action.

The Company is also currently a party to various other legal proceedings in addition to those already mentioned. Management does not believe that the likely outcome of any of these other reviews, inspections, investigations or other legal proceedings is expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources.

See also Note 7 (“Credit Losses”) for information on promissory notes related to the CAT.