When hundreds of millions of people don't leave their homes, millions of small businesses die. 
If it's mandatory for everyone, maybe; if it becomes an option, then things will transition, as they always have. To be quite honest, having companies get comfortable with having a workforce that is at least partially remote will bring with it many opportunities, not the least of which is providing a better quality of life to some of their employees - no more spending 2 hours commuting each way back and forth - as well as cost savings - cutting back significantly on the amount of office real estate they have to rent out - and the owners and employees of companies that go out of business at the former office locations - e.g., restaurants that can no longer afford to operate because they no longer get a big lunch rush - will adjust, just as they always have.
That will also bring with it additional complexity because, for example, if an employer that used to have its offices solely in Manhattan now has significant employees in New Jersey and Connecticut as well as in NY, that employer will have payroll tax obligations and its own income tax filing and liability obligations in three states (CT, NJ, NY) instead of just one (NY). However, to the extent that an employer can utilize its remote workforce to source some of its income out of NYC and into NJ, that employer may end up with an overall lower effective rate of tax, since it will no longer be subject to NYC income tax or NYS income tax on that part of its income, and will instead just be subject to NJ income tax.
When people converted from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles, a lot of people were put out of work - think of all the street sweepers who were employed sweeping up after the horses in Manhattan - but society and the economy adjusted, and the net result was a positive gain.
