It's not impossible, it just requires an intelligent weighting approach. Tax rates on yachts, private jets, estates, and luxury goods can safely be made much, much higher than taxes on groceries and other staples, for example.
The taxing of mobile luxury good hasn't played out well in the past, specifically on yachts. The rich just buy their boats elsewhere and domestic boat builders lose their work
Those are just targeting the 0.1% though. The average $250,000/year earner isn't buying any of that except for maybe "luxury goods", however you define those.
I don't see any tenable path towards implementing this kind of taxation scheme. Consumer spending is the driving force of the US economy, and higher taxes on spending would cause serious reductions in spending in favor of saving (which goes untaxed). So you'd see huge collapses in goods and services industries, with people putting off big purchases until after the inevitable collapse of the new taxation scheme. Meanwhile entire companies are dying and millions becoming unemployed.
My effective total taxation rate under your proposed scheme would go from ~45% to under 10%. I save most of my income, and housing is more than half of the money I do save. I don't live in luxury housing or anything, and since you're discounting income, you thus couldn't charge me any more in taxes on my housing than my neighbors who earn significantly less (and couldn't afford to pay huge taxes on expensive housing).
In California, where we have those kinds of balances (no sales tax on groceries, for example), it ends up hitting the middle class disproportionately.
Since the poor spend most of their income, and the rich don't spend most of it, you are in any case taxing a higher portion of the income of poor people (with consumption taxes).
