There's been a lot on "de-officing" in the news and I think it will be a thing for sure. I'd guess around half of office jobs can be done equally well at home.
There are enormous benefits to skipping commutes in major cities, you would have a lot of people getting a couple hours of their life back, every day. That's huge. Reduced impact on global warming too. (Tinfoil hat - covid invented to scare people and reduce CO2 emmissions to save planet!)
I see this as almost all benefit from an urban economics standpoint.
There is a continuum of workers from those who need to be there all the time (e.g., shift workers in emergency rooms, like Dr. Sigma) to those who essentially never need to be there (such as software salesman yours truly). There are plenty of people in the middle where coming into the office for meetings or to touch base a time or two a week or a few times per month would be helpful, but daily would be overkill.
For the former types, this does nothing but help them because the latter types are likely to move further and further out to acquire cheaper and more spacious real estate. Making a 2-3 hour commute daily is not viable, but doing that a few times per month probably would be. The pattern I am seeing around here is not that people are going to completely disconnect from their home base, but rather move out to stay within "striking distance" for those infrequent trips but stay in the regional orbit of a major city.
Here is a 90-minute range for Washington, DC --
Extend that to 120 or 180 minutes, and you pick up most of the northern half of Virginia, most of Maryland, southern Pennsylvania, and eastern West Virginia. There is a lot of space out there for people to setup bespoke "work from home" communities.
The same thing for Des Moines --
A three-hour window from Des Moines covers most of the state. There are plenty of small towns in rural Iowa that could see revitalization as "work from home" communities far beyond the traditional range of "bedroom" towns in Polk County.
These people distancing themselves would reduce the squeeze on real estate prices for the stock close into cities and reduce the burden on transportation infrastructure, which makes living close and moving around much cheaper and easier for the people who really do need (or really want) to be there. You are also right the reducing in VMT has environmental and air quality benefits (and less wear on the infrastructure). I see nothing but benefits there to decompress many of the stresses that come with density.
The downside is that you miss out on social interaction. People joke about jerk co-workers, but it is a benefit (at least net-net). You will also lose some jobs maintaining/cleaning buildings. And there will be a major impact on the construction industry, office interiors companies, and all the folks that work in those industries. That will be a bigger economic impact than lost property values.
We just bought a new building for our business, but it is 85% warehouse/mfr space, so I feel ok about that.
You are completely right this is going to be a sea change (and not much for the better) for the sectors you mentioned. That might balance out (somewhat) by increased demand for modern and suburban-style homes in exurban locations (and with an extra bedroom or two for the parents' home offices, which are pretty nice to have).
We might be building fewer suburban office complexes in Waukee, but we might be building some newer, nicer, and larger homes in (to pick a random place) somewhere like Creston for professionals from Des Moines who can work from home.