DOL Signals Significant Shift in ERISA Enforcement Priorities: Key Takeaways from FAB 2026-01

The US Department of Labor, through its Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), recently issued Field Assistance Bulletin 2026-01 and provided additional perspective through Assistant Secretary Daniel Aronowitz’s April 2026 congressional testimony. Together, these developments signal a meaningful recalibration of EBSA’s enforcement philosophy under ERISA—one that may materially affect plan sponsors, fiduciaries, and other parties within the DOL’s regulatory scope, including service providers and investment consultants/managers.

A REORIENTATION TOWARD FAIR, FOCUSED, AND TRANSPARENT ENFORCEMENT

On April 14, 2026, the DOL issued Field Assistance Bulletin (FAB) 2026-01, “Guiding Principles for EBSA Enforcement Priorities.” FABs are “written by the Office of Regulations and Interpretations to the Director of Enforcement and Regional Directors to provide guidance in response to questions that have arisen in [investigation] field operations.”

While directed to DOL staff, FABs often provide meaningful information to the employee benefits community regarding the DOL’s views on applicable laws and, in such cases as these, how the agency intends to manage its enforcement program. Here, FAB 2026-01 is described by the DOL as “set[ting] forth EBSA’s enforcement priorities and guiding principle.” It does so by outlining a set of guiding principles intended to ensure enforcement is “fair, even-handed, responsive, and focused,” emphasizing transparency and consistency in EBSA’s approach.

At its core, the FAB portends agency leadership’s intended shift away from broad or aggressive enforcement strategies toward a more disciplined and targeted approach.

The FAB sets out four principal priorities:

• Focus on egregious conduct and significant participant harm
• Avoid “regulation by enforcement” in favor of clear guidance and predictability
• Require senior-level review for significant or novel enforcement initiatives
• Promote timely and efficient investigations

This framework suggests a deliberate effort to align enforcement activity more closely with material risks to participants and beneficiaries rather than technical violations. As discussed below, it can also be read in conjunction with recent congressional testimony by Assistant Secretary Aronowitz.

However, this development should not be read as the end of all DOL enforcement. In fact, the FAB makes clear that it is not a retreat from enforcement. Rather, EBSA emphasizes its continued commitment to protecting plan participants and beneficiaries, with a focus on where enforcement resources have the greatest impact.

In this regard, the FAB makes clear that “[w]hile adhering to the principles and priorities discussed in this memorandum, including our focus on matters evidencing the most harm to participants, beneficiaries and the employee benefit system, EBSA remains committed to protecting benefits for plan participants and beneficiaries through the enforcement of ERISA.”

Priority #1: Enforcement Resources Will Be Concentrated on High-Impact Violations

The first priority is “focusing enforcement on the most egregious conduct and significant harm.” Together with other points discussed in the FAB, this supports DOL’s clear intention of prioritizing cases involving the most serious misconduct or greatest harm. The FAB specifically states that “EBSA investigators should seek out and target cases where the DOL can make the most significant difference in addressing harm to plan participants and beneficiaries.”

This priority has several implications:

• Routine compliance errors or minor fiduciary breaches may receive less enforcement attention
• Investigations may become more selective and risk-based
• Investigated parties may experience fewer “fishing expedition” style audits, albeit significant violations will face heightened scrutiny

For plan sponsors, ERISA fiduciaries, and other parties within the DOL’s regulatory scope, this priority underscores the importance of identifying and mitigating high-risk areas, particularly those affecting large participant populations or plan assets.

Priority #2: Retreat from Regulation by Enforcement

Priority #2 is “ensuring, whenever possible and consistent with our mission, that EBSA does not regulate by enforcement and instead promotes fairness, prior notice, and clarity to the regulated community.”

The FAB emphasizes that EBSA intends to avoid creating new regulatory standards through enforcement actions where feasible, and instead prioritize providing clear guidance and advance notice to the regulated community.

This principle may be viewed as a response to prior concerns that enforcement activity had at times been used to expand fiduciary obligations to include interpretations and duties not clearly articulated. In his testimony, Assistant Secretary Aronowitz reinforced this position, noting the importance of regulatory overreach and its impact on plan innovation and administration.

Plan sponsors, ERISA fiduciaries, and other parties within the DOL’s regulatory scope may welcome this commitment as it could bring a more predictable compliance environment. However, it remains to be seen how the DOL will actually interpret the concept of “regulation by enforcement”: for example, it is unlikely to mean that the DOL will cease all investigations that involve novel issues or unique facts. And it certainly will not preclude the DOL from investigations on clearly articulated fiduciary standards.

In this regard the FAB does make clear that certain investigatory priorities will continue, “including but not limited to health benefit rules under Part 7, disclosure requirements, claims processing, and adjudication requirements.” The guidance suggests that new or evolving interpretations are more likely to be communicated through formal guidance than developed solely through enforcement actions.

Priority #3: Greater Coordination and Consistency in Enforcement Positions

Priority #3 requires senior-level review of “critical” enforcement matters, or novel enforcement matters. This includes cases involving new legal theories, departures from prior agency interpretations, or issues with broader policy implications.

This approach indicates a move toward greater centralization of enforcement decision-making and a more deliberate vetting process for high-impact cases, and plan sponsors, ERISA fiduciaries, and other parties within the DOL’s regulatory scope may see increased consistency in enforcement positions across regions as well as fewer instances of region-specific interpretations.

It also suggests that where the DOL does advance novel or significant positions, such positions are more likely to reflect considered agency policy rather than regional interpretation.

Priority #4: Emphasis on Timely Resolution of Enforcement Matters

Priority #4 focuses on promoting timely and efficient investigations, reflecting EBSA’s stated goal of reducing unnecessary delay and improving the overall administration of its enforcement program. The agency intends to streamline investigative processes, reduce unnecessary delays, and promote timely resolution of enforcement matters.

This priority may translate to the following:

• Investigations may be more focused in scope and duration
• Requests for information may become more targeted and purposeful
• Regulated parties may benefit from faster resolution timelines, reducing prolonged uncertainty

This shift underscores the importance of being prepared to respond promptly and effectively to agency inquiries. While shorter timelines may reduce administrative burden in the long run, they may also require more immediate coordination and well-organized compliance practices.

Taken together, these developments suggest a more disciplined and risk-focused enforcement environment. For plan sponsors, ERISA fiduciaries, and other parties within the DOL’s regulatory scope, this may provide greater predictability and reduce the likelihood of enforcement actions based on technical or low-impact issues.

However, the shift also reinforces the importance of maintaining strong fiduciary governance and compliance practices in areas that present meaningful risk. The DOL’s focus on high-impact violations means deficiencies affecting plan assets, participant rights, or large populations may receive heightened scrutiny.

Plan sponsors, ERISA fiduciaries, and other parties within the DOL’s regulatory scope may wish to revisit their compliance frameworks with this in mind, with an eye toward ensuring that governance structures, internal controls, and documentation practices are aligned with areas of greatest exposure. Continued monitoring of EBSA guidance and enforcement activity will also be crucial as the agency begins to implement priorities in practice.

LOOKING AHEAD

FAB 2026-01 and Assistant Secretary Aronowitz’s testimony reflect a notable evolution in EBSA’s enforcement philosophy. While the ultimate impact will depend on how these principles are implemented in practice, the shift toward a more targeted, transparent, and coordinated approach to enforcement is clear.

If you receive a DOL audit request or are deciding how to best address the DOL’s recent enforcement priority shift, please feel free to contact the authors or your Morgan Lewis contacts.