This is true, but CIPA is the law that is being exploited for its ambiguous applicability. There are lawyers out there actively targeting companies who legitimately believe they do not need a cookie banner.

They seek out customers of the company ("Are you now, or have you been, a customer of X? You may be the victim of Y/eligible for legal settlement Z/etc.") They may even identify the corporate targets, and recruit new customers for their purpose.

And the way to avoid the issue completely is to add a stupid, superfluous, cookie banner. (Which, in the height of absurdity, requires adding a cookie).

It was a painful and semi-expensive lesson for this small company. And their expensive/prominent lawyers say they are seeing the problem increasing. (I asked why they didn't take the time to warn their clients, but did not get a satisfactory answer).

So it's worth a thought and a note when the idea of not needing a cookie banner comes up.