The securities provided include securities and guarantees provided to our customers, suppliers and other stakeholders (or those of our non-consolidated participating interests). The parent company guarantees provided mainly concern the guarantees for the charter of the two FSRUs for use by our non-consolidated participating interest EemsEnergyTerminal. The other guarantees concern almost exclusively guarantees to certain credit providers of loans taken out by our non-consolidated participating interest Gate terminal. The guarantees are not freely assignable. The term of the securities provided generally varies between 1 and 10 years; a limited number of securities do not have an agreed end date. 

Of the guarantees provided, € 322.8 million (year-end 2023: € 204.5 million) relates to guarantees for which we do not expect an outgoing cash flow based on the nature of the guarantee (because we consider it unlikely that the beneficiary will make a claim under the guarantee). Besides this, € 448.6 million (year-end 2023: € 576.9 million) concerns guarantees related to the payment obligations of our non-consolidated participating interests. These guarantees provided will only result in an outgoing cash flow at Gasunie if the non-consolidated participating interest fails to meet its payment obligations and the beneficiary makes a claim under the guarantee. 

Lastly, we would like to note that at year-end 2024 we had received € 176.2 million (year-end 2023: € 198.6 million) in counter-guarantees from our co-shareholder in EemsEnergyTerminal (Vopak). Given that the legal conditions for netting have not been met, we have not deducted the counter-guarantees from the guarantees we have provided. 

Taking into account the effects mentioned above, we have effectively provided guarantees to the sum of € 17.9 million (year-end 2023: € 12.5 million) for which Gasunie may have underlying payment obligations in the future.  These underlying payment obligations have not been included in the balance sheet, because the existence of an obligation depends on whether or not one or more uncertain future events materialise.

The long-term commitments mainly related to the procurement of nitrogen production capacity, reserved transmission capacity over transmission pipelines not fully owned by us and the associated management services, and IT and other services. 

The long-term commitments do not include any possible obligations relating to the future supply of energy under forward delivery contracts we have concluded. For further details of these contracts see the ‘price risk’ section of note ‎28 ‘Financial instruments’.

We closely and continuously monitor the operational imbalance and continuously settle this in kind with the adjacent network operator, storage facility or production site by physically supplying or receiving natural gas. We only use OBAs for operational, not commercial, purposes. 

We base the use of the OBAs on the going concern assumption and a continuous settlement in kind. We only settle imbalances financially if the party to the agreement has ceased its gas transmission operations, meaning settlement through the physical supply of gas is no longer possible. The OBAs are perpetual in nature. Given the considerations stated above, the balance of gas to be received or to be supplied can be regarded as ‘perpetual’ and, accordingly, its net present value on the balance sheet date is € 0. For this reason, the imbalances are included in the off-balance sheet assets and liabilities. 

At year-end 2024, the cumulative operational imbalance volume was 32 GWh positive (year-end 2023: 41 GWh negative), meaning that we had a supply obligation towards adjacent networks, storage facilities and/or production sites. Based on the TTF spot price on the balance sheet date, the value of this ‘imbalance liability’ (gas we still need to supply) was approx. € 1.5 million (year-end 2023: ‘imbalance claim’ (gas we still need to receive) of approx. € 1.3 million). 

In addition to imbalances under the OBAs, imbalances in the portfolios of our customers can also occur. Here, too, we in principle apply a going concern assumption and a continuous settlement in kind. We only settle imbalances financially if the party to the agreement has ceased its gas transmission operations (meaning settlement through the physical supply of gas is no longer possible) or when they exceed the agreed credit limits. At year-end 2024, our customers had a negative cumulative imbalance volume of 19 GWh (year-end 2023: 3 GWh negative). Based on the TTF spot price on the balance sheet date, the value of this imbalance claim was approx. € 0.9 million (year-end 2023: approx. € 0.1 million). 

For a significant portion of our assets, the decommissioning obligation is only a conditional obligation. We have not included a provision in the balance sheet for the assets for which we are not obliged to remove the assets and remediate the site under laws and regulations or under rights or permits, conditional to certain future events not arising. Examples of such future events are situations where our assets result in environmental contamination after decommissioning, or when a rights holder or a permit issuer, invoking a relevant contractual arrangement or authority under public law, requires us to remove our decommissioned assets.

We currently expect that our decommissioning obligations will only materialise in a limited number of cases. We expect that the transmission of natural gas will remain important in the coming years and that we will then keep a significant part of our assets in operation in the service of the energy transition, for example for the transport of hydrogen or as part of CCS. Developments in the energy transition may cause us to revise this assumption in the future. 

In addition, we expect that we will ultimately not be required to remove decommissioned assets in many cases because the social cost will not outweigh the costs of removal, with the result that the parties involved will not require us to actually remove these decommissioned assets. Rights holders or permit issuers may also waive their right to have decommissioned assets removed for other practical reasons. This assumption may change if our policy and/or that of the third parties involved changes in the future and/or because of advancements in technical removal options. 

Furthermore, one of our customers has initiated proceedings with the court to terminate its long-term capacity contracts prior to the contract end date. In our view, this customer’s claim is without merit. If the claim were, however, to be declared legitimate in whole or in part, we do not expect this to have any direct financial impact for us due to the legally stipulated revenue regulation system. 

In addition, we have filed claims against a Gazprom Export LLC regarding their failure to comply with contractual obligations towards us and, in response to our claims, we have also received opposing claims from Gazprom Export LLC, for which we believe there is no legal basis. We have not recognised a receivable or liability in the balance sheet for the outcome of these claims.

Lastly, we have appealed to the Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal against ACM’s decision of December 2024 to amend the Dutch Gas Transmission Code for the National TSO. Through this amendment, ACM is attempting to create a basis for imposing Inter-TSO compensation on our participating interest BBL Company. We disagree with ACM’s view.