IJmuiden Ver Gamma: the Netherlands changed the price, not the cost of being late

Nederwiek I-A, a Dutch offshore wind site of about 1 GW, closed on 30 October 2025 without a single application. For IJmuiden Ver Gamma-A and Gamma-B, two sites of about the same size, each regulation now runs a subsidy procedure beside an auction; the notes keep the auction in case market conditions again allow a bid without subsidy.^{1, 2, 3, 11, 12}

What did not change is the money behind the permit: as under Nederwiek I-A’s regulation, the winner posts EUR 100 million and forfeits EUR 10 million for a period in which it has not done what the permit sets, then EUR 10 million for each month after it.^{1, 2, 12} RVO, the Netherlands Enterprise Agency, which organises the tender, tells applicants that the guarantee is linked to one milestone only: the wind farm ready to deliver full power.^{3, 5, 6} Its model guarantee puts that deadline at 31 March 2032 if applications come in for both sites, and at 30 September 2031 if they come in for only one.^{7, 8}

So the forfeits for lateness hang on a single date, and when its bid goes in, a bidder cannot know which date will be its own: that turns on the other site.

TenneT, the grid operator, builds the offshore grid, and both sites connect to one TenneT platform, whose 2 GW direct-current link lands at Maasvlakte.^{1, 2, 3} RVO’s answers explain that the government’s development framework for that grid allows twelve months between the platform being ready for electrical cable pull-in and the wind farm being ready to deliver full power if both sites are permitted, and six consecutive months if only one is. That is judged when the winners are announced: if one site has no ranked application, the other site’s winner gets six months; if one applicant has both sites ranked, it gets twelve, even if it then declines to post the guarantee for one. Applying for both is allowed; a declined site goes to the next applicant in its ranking.^{5, 6}

The model guarantee frames the condition by applications submitted, RVO’s answers by ranked applications, so the two could differ for a site whose applications are all left unranked.

The regulation’s other periods are tests, not deadlines: a permit is granted only if it is sufficiently plausible that construction can start within 39 months and operation within 54 months of the permit becoming irrevocable, and the notes say these periods serve only to assess the application, the permit’s own periods following TenneT’s milestones.^{1, 2} RVO’s answers add that missing them brings no penalty.^{5, 6}

The regulations’ notes say the permit will hold the holder to, and let it rely on, three milestones: TenneT’s platform ready for cable pull-in, the wind farm ready to deliver full power, and delivery of the direct-current link. If the platform is not ready for cable pull-in by its date in the development framework, the notes add, the minister will in principle grant an exemption from the permit’s deadlines, which prevents the guarantee from being forfeited. They name a second case: if an objection and appeal by another party leaves less than 48 months between the permit becoming irrevocable and the platform being ready for cable pull-in, the minister will consult TenneT and the holder, set new milestones, and in principle grant the same exemption.^{1, 2}

The delay risk is split unevenly. A platform not ready for cable pull-in by its framework date, or an appeal that leaves less than 48 months, is in principle met by an exemption; the developer’s own lateness falls on the guarantee. For a late direct-current link the notes name no exemption.^{1, 2} RVO’s answers, asked about TenneT finishing the platform late, put it more firmly: under the regulation, the minister grants an exemption where circumstances at the grid operator keep the wind farm from being ready to deliver full power on time, though the answers defer to the regulation wherever one is incomplete, wrong or open to interpretation. A bidder pricing TenneT risk therefore has the notes’ “in principle” and RVO’s firmer answer, not one settled rule.^{5, 6}

The EUR 100 million is a bank guarantee from a bank established in the European Economic Area or a surety (the regulations’ waarborgsom) from an insurer with at least a long-term A rating, due within four weeks of the permit; miss that, and the permit goes to the next applicant in the ranking.^{1, 2} For a bank guarantee, RVO’s answers require one guarantee for the full amount, not several smaller ones.⁵ Under RVO’s model texts, the bank or insurer pays on first written demand, within 15 working days, without asking for reasons, and each partial call lowers the amount left.^{7, 8}

The notes put a bank guarantee’s cost, at 1% a year, at about EUR 1 million a year and about EUR 5 million in total over at most five years.^{1, 2} Walking away costs the full amount: a request to withdraw the permit is granted only if made within two years of the permit’s grant, with proof that the obligations are not technically, financially or economically feasible, and the minister first calls the guarantee in full. A request to change the bid or the tender amount is refused.¹³

A second guarantee follows once the wind farm produces: a bank guarantee for removing it, due at the latest when RVO has proof that guarantees of origin have been issued, at a base amount of EUR 120,000 per MW to be built, indexed by 2% a year for 12 years with no cap on the indexation, and set again after 12 and 24 years of operation. It must come from a Dutch systemic bank (systeembank) or a bank on the Financial Stability Board’s list of global systemically important banks; an insurer with a long-term A rating, eligible for the first guarantee, does not qualify. A developer that uses an insurer, or a bank in the European Economic Area outside those two lists, for the first guarantee will need a different issuer for the second.^{5, 6}

An applicant submits at most one application for each site’s permit, in one procedure or the other, and companies in a group count as one applicant. Auction applications are dealt with first; subsidy applications only if the auction does not lead to a permit.^{1, 2} The general conditions and the prequalification criteria apply either way.^{3, 4}

In the auction the highest bid ranks first: a one-off payment in whole euros, unchangeable once submitted and due within four weeks of the permit. The application includes draft agreements to supply the wind farm’s electricity to third parties. The notes say the guarantee backs that payment too: unpaid, it can in the end lead to withdrawal of the permit and forfeiture of the full amount.^{1, 2}

In the subsidy procedure the lowest tender amount ranks first: a price in euros per kWh, to six decimals, at most EUR 0.117 per kWh for Gamma-A and EUR 0.116 for Gamma-B; the subsidy runs for 15 years. The maximum number of full-load hours equals the P50 value for net electricity production stated in the application, capped at 4,000 where the P50 is higher.^{1, 2, 3, 4} The subsidy tops up the market price towards the tender amount: as the notes describe it, it is paid afterwards, on actual production, when the yearly average market price is below the tender amount, but nothing is paid on any gap below the base electricity price. Above the revenue cap the holder repays subsidy received, up to at most what was paid out. No subsidy is granted before the European Commission has approved the regulation as state aid.^{1, 2}

Source: the ministerial regulations for Gamma-A and Gamma-B, articles 12 to 15, cited below.^{1, 2, 3, 4}

The minister told parliament on 11 June 2026 that the maximums had been raised from the drafts’ EUR 104 and EUR 103 per MWh to EUR 117 and EUR 116 because of the risk of the invoedingstarief, a grid charge on producers that the ACM, the regulator, was then developing; the Dutch word translates as “feed-in tariff”, but it is a charge producers pay for the grid, not a subsidy. Bidders are expected to price that risk in: after the permit, there is no room to discuss further compensation once the tariff’s design and level are known.^{1, 2, 10}

Each site may feed at most 1 GW into TenneT’s platform at any moment, but up to 1.15 GW may be installed.⁵ The notes say the subsidy ceiling is sized for 1 GW at the maximum full-load hours and tender amount, that an application for the full 1.15 GW is possible within it, for example with a tender amount well below the maximum, and that one above the ceiling will be refused.^{1, 2} RVO’s answers of 29 September 2026 give another outcome, subject to the regulation: where maximum overplanting, a high tender amount and 4,000 full-load hours put the request above the ceiling, RVO lowers the subsidised full-load hours until the request equals it. Either way no subsidy is paid beyond the ceiling; the notes say an application that asks for more is refused, RVO’s answers that it is trimmed.^{5, 6}

So the route mainly changes who pays whom; the guarantee, its full-power date and the prequalification stay the same.

The supply-chain commitments decide which turbines a bid can name. An application is refused unless the applicant commits, among other things, to these: no more than 85% of the turbines’ permanent magnets from one third country; for at least 75% of the turbines, no turbine, no drive system and no more than four of the listed main components from the People’s Republic of China; and operational control kept by an operator established in the European Economic Area. The applicant’s equity and capital commitments must reach at least 20% of the wind farm’s total investment cost; on request, those of consortium members and of a parent company count too.^{1, 2} Since 1 January 2026, the Investment Screening Bureau (BTI) has carried out a mandatory security screening, and applicants send it their information form themselves before the tender closes.³

Denmark’s offshore wind tenders of 2024 drew no bids for their first three areas by the deadline. On 20 November 2025 the Danish Energy Agency opened tenders for three areas, with what it calls a “2-sided capability-based contract for difference”, under which the state guarantees producers a fixed price for their electricity.¹⁴

On 4 August 2026 the agency announced that Vattenfall Vindkraft had won the two areas whose bids were due on 20 May 2026, each with the lowest bid: Nordsøen Midt at DKK 504 per MWh, from 2 bids, and Hesselø at DKK 542 per MWh, from 5. Each price is guaranteed for 20 years from the wind farm’s completion.¹⁵

The prices work differently. In Denmark the winning bid is a price per MWh guaranteed for 20 years under the two-sided contract; in the Dutch subsidy route it is a tender amount per kWh, topped up for 15 years when the yearly market price is below it and repaid only above a higher revenue cap; in the Dutch auction it is a one-off payment to the state.

As of 19 October 2026, RVO’s pages for both sites are headed “Bijna open voor aanvragen” (almost open for applications), with the window running from 00:00 on 26 November 2026 to 17:00 on 10 December 2026; RVO takes new questions up to and including 19 November 2026, and its pages expect the permits in the first quarter of 2027 and the wind farms in use in 2032, given enough applications. Which of the two dates, 31 March 2032 or 30 September 2031, a winner must meet is settled only after the window closes: by the applications submitted, under the model guarantee, or by whether each site has a winner, under RVO’s answers.^{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9}

ListingMinds, “IJmuiden Ver Gamma: the Netherlands changed the price, not the cost of being late”, 3 November 2026. https://www.listingminds.com/energy/field-notes/dutch-offshore-wind-tender-ijmuiden-ver-gamma