US · guidance
Justice Manual § 9-135.020
Investigative and Supervisory Jurisdiction
Supervisory jurisdiction over ERISA violations rests with the Labor-Management Unit, Violent Crime and Racketeering Section.
Investigative jurisdiction for criminal violations within title I of ERISA is assigned to the Department of Labor and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding dated February 9, 1975, entered into between the Departments of Justice and Labor, the FBI has the authority to investigate violations of 29 U.S.C. § 1111 (prohibition against holding office in or being employed by a benefit plan after conviction of certain crimes) and 29 U.S.C. § 1141 (use of fraud or force to interfere with benefit plan rights). The Department of Labor investigates violations of 29 U.S.C. § 1131(a) (reporting, disclosure, and retention of records by benefit plans). The Memorandum of Understanding permits different arrangements with respect to criminal investigations of those crimes to be made by the Departments of Justice and Labor on a case-by-case basis. Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1134, the Department of Labor is authorized to investigate violations of 29 U.S.C. § 1131(b) and § 1149 (knowing false statements in connection with the marketing or sale of multiple employer welfare arrangements) which was enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Sec. 6601; 124 Stat. 779 (2010).
History
[updated January 2020]
Provenance
- Source
- justice.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-20
- Edition
- jm-2026-09-20
- Content hash
fd97656c39eb1aa0d53bd39017e30ce9731957340029926c3fafd72e64bf69e8
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.