It's odd to me that they would give current local employees living in high-cost areas a significant incentive to not transfer to remote when a remote worker arg

It's odd to me that they would give current local employees living in high-cost areas a significant incentive to not transfer to remote when a remote worker arguably costs significantly less to employ. The costs keeping a building in a high-cost area are huge and increasing constantly. Moving those costs (rent, utilities, etc.) to the employee is a major cost savings.