Mar. 31, 2023
To Whom it may Concern, When crafting rules to ensure fair access to markets, information, and trades, the rules the SEC passes is really only as good as it's enforcement. Without significantly higher fines to serve as a true deterrent, or the possibility of a loss of license, broker-dealers will continue to accrue minimal fines that amount to nothing more than a cost of doing business. I, along with many other retail investors would happily pay a few cents more, or a small commission on trades to avoid being routed through a wholesaler, especially ones like Citadel Securities that have long histories of being charged by the US government. I fully support the harmonization of tick sizes across all exchanges. I was shocked to learn that some exchanges get special treatment and are able to leverage that special treatment to build monopolies in some areas of the market. All exchanges should have to quote AND trade in the same increments. The markets are supposed to be fair - so please, make them fair. The presence of rebates and other inducements in the marketplace are simply payment for order flow by another name, and I would prefer you reduce access fees to zero. Additionally, I would like to advocate for clear and concise language and unambiguous tick size rule structures would prevent funds and firms from using lawyers to get away with skirting the rules. I also support the inclusion of odd lot information in the SIP, and applaud the Commission's efforts to provide individual investors with more information with which to make better investing decisions - especially concerning which firms are allowed to handle our orders. If the Commission were to remove odd lot information from this rule, my faith in the U.S. markets would become even more damaged than it already is. Please look into a way to fairly and proportionately include odd lots in the calculation of the NBBO. Thank you, Matthew Shaw