The Serious Fraud Office is reviewing material connected to the 2013 Concorde Agreement between Formula One and the FIA.
The review has been prompted by MP Damian Collins, who has asked the the investigatory body to look into to the agreement, which saw payments made between the sport and its regulator.
Collins, who is Chairman of the Culture, Media and Sport Parliamentary select committee said to ITV; "I'm very concerned about it. When we look at other financial scandals in sports, it often comes out of the detail and payments that don't make sense or contracts that don't seem clear. So we have to take it seriously. That's why I have written to the Serious Fraud office and asked them to look at this deal and say do they feel there was a breach of the bribery act."
In its forth year of implementation, and due to run until 2020, The Concorde Agreement has been contentious since the start.
The agreement shook up how F1 was managed, in Robin Hood method. The agreement took powers from smaller teams and giving those powers to the FIA and Formula One. Additionally, the FIA received £3.9m and a 1 percent stake in the sport it was regulating.
This move raised questions on how impartial the FIA could be when it had a stake in the sport it was in charge of keeping in line.
The FIA's take in Formula One also mean that it could block takeover bids such as the one recently executed by Liberty Media and which the FIA made $80m.
The FIA deny any wrong doing as have asserted that the payments were for its role as a regulator and that no individual benefited personally from the deal. In a statement they said:
"Within this agreement, a lump sum payment of $5 (£3.9) was made to the FIA as part of the global consideration received in connection with the renegotiation of the terms of the agreements between the commercial rights holder and the FIA, and of the Concorde Agreement, at that time.
"Following it's approval, the Concorde Implementation Agreement came into force and this sum was paid to the FIA and properly accounted for. No individual received any payment out of this sum. Any allegation to the contrary would be defamatory."
The Serious Fraud Office has confirmed that it is reviewing material "in its possession relating to these allegations."
sections 1 and sections 7 corporate offence