OK, so thinking out loud:
The branch can scoop up congregations' surplus funds, so there's a nice influx of cash for the WTS;
If the resolved amounts can't be met, there's to be no soliciting of funds but the cong. will be reminded of (guilted about) their pledges.
HOWEVER, rather than the equivalent of the KH loan being paid indefinitely, could it be that the resolved monthly contributions to the Construction work would drop off in the long term? Here's why:
The letter says that if the cong. already has a monthly loan repayment, the elders propose a resolution to at least meet that monthly repayment (no confidential survey taken beforehand - it's only the Halls that don't have loans or current regular payments to the Construction work that take the confidential survey - besides, before a cong. took out a loan with the WTS, a survey was done beforehand anyway). Every May the elders convene to review how the cong. is doing meeting their resolved amount and if it is still realistic for them.
I see this possible scenario. A cong. with a loan/mortgage feels they've had it wiped - that's what p. 1 of the letter says, after all. Whoopee. The elders propose a new resolution matching the monthly loan repayment. But because the pubs. think they don't have to pay back the debt any more, they become less motivated to keep up their donations like before. May comes along and the elders find that, for the previous few months, there has been a shortfall and reminders (guilting) from the stage has done little to address the problem. So they decide to take a new financial survey; publishers pledge less to the Construction work, and a new resolution for a lesser amount is proposed and carried. Next year, rinse and repeat until donations reach some sort of equilibrium well below what was resolved in the 1st year of this new arrangement.
Does this scenario fly? What do you all think?