May an ERISA plan participant or beneficiary seek disgorgement of unreasonable profits derived from a plan contract from a nonfiduciary party in interest?

QUESTION PRESENTED Respondent Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company offers an investment fund to retirement plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1001 et seg. Through their ERISA plans, individuals like petitioner John Teets can invest their retirement savings in Great-West’s fund. Great-West holds ongoing and unilateral authority to set the interest rate it pays to participants in the fund. And Great-West keeps the spread between that interest and the returns it generates by investing participant contributions to the fund. Thus, the lower it sets the interest rate for participants, the more money Great-West makes for itself. Over the class period, Great-West made hundreds of millions in profits from this arrangement. Great-West’s conduct violates ERISA’s clear rules barring parties in interest from using plan assets (here, the fund contract) to benefit themselves. See 29 U.S.C. 1106(a). This Court has held that where a party in interest violates those rules, plan participants can force them to disgorge their ill-gotten gains. See Harris Trust & Sav. Banky. Salomon Smith Barney, 530 U.S. 238, 250 (2000). Multiple courts of appeals have held the same. In the decision below, the Tenth Circuit flouted that rule, holding that disgorgement was unavailable because the plan asset at issue was the fund contract—not specific property over which petitioner could himself assert title. The question presented is: May an ERISA plan participant or beneficiary seek disgorgement of unreasonable profits derived from a plan contract from a nonfiduciary party in interest? (I) II STATEMENT OF