These types of things always irk me.
The pay cut for remote workers totally makes sense - if I'm a business that used to require you to live in one of the costliest cities in the world and now I'm saying you can live anywhere, if you choose to move somewhere cheap, why would I pay you Palo Alto wages?
But to institute tax policy that discourages work from home is just so wrong. In fact, it is utterly backwards if you care about things like carbon footprint, land use, highway congestion, air pollution and any other number of actual problems.
The problem in the US is that wages are the bottom are too low and this is due to a lot of policies aimed at holding wages down or, more often, aimed at helping the investor class regardless of the impact on the working class. We have had a bias for 40 years against inflation, for example, which favors investors, but generally hurts workers as it tends to increase unemployment and push wages down.
Instead of just paying people at the bottom more, we have a zillion policies that effectively amount to subsidies to businesses and all consumers, including the very rich, by propping up businesses with subsidies (such as food stamps, Medicare) and keeping the cost of dining out and buying all manner of crap cheap for rich and poor alike.
In the words of Nick Hanauer, "We have a technology to eradicate poverty. It's called money." Just pay people enough to make it worth it for them to leave their homes.
