A digital nomad visa essentially says: look we agree that this employee is not going to be subject to our tax and other regulatory laws. And thus the country would be preempted from making the claim that a company has a physical presence in the company that could potentially subject them to the labor, tax and other laws of the country. In this sense, many countries are making themselves more attractive than STATES WITHIN THE US to have a worker in.

California can start to tax a company that has full-time employees situated in the state. A full-time remote worker in Georgia could sue an Idaho company using the local Georgia employment laws. Do you get the picture? As a remote worker you could potentially create a large number of administrative and potential legal burdens. Again, this could bode very well for those who want to use digital nomad visas. They likelihood of a foreign jurisdiction pursuing a company situated in the United States WHILE at the same time the employee is on a digital nomad visa is next to zero. That is one of the main purposes of the visa, perhaps the main purpose: make companies see the light in allowing their high-wage earning employees (who spend a lot and don't use use many public services) to live in their country without scaring off the employer. Win win all around. Except of course for states like California who are taxing and regulating themselves into poverty.