You're taxing the wrong thing. Your idea would be great if we wanted billionaires to act like regular joes. But generally, in North America, we don't care about that. The problem was about fixing the deficit.
yummyfajitas was right: consumption taxes are generally considered regressive. Also, the rich, or even the professional class, have many more options to disguise their consumption as business expenses.
Consumption taxes can be regressive. Ideas like the Fair Tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax) generally include provisions to reduce the disproportionate effects on people making less money (and proportionally spending more to survive).
Taxing consumption also encourages people to save and invest. In my opinion, this is a much better base for a society than encouraging spending and not saving. Most western countries tax income less and consumption more than the US.
Disguise? There are no exemptions. A significant focus of the idea is to remove the politics, special cases, and loopholes around the tax system.
The 10th largest economy in the world functions on property and sales taxes alone. We call it Texas.
The point is billionaires won't live like regular joes. You think just because the tax is higher they will start purchasing a Timex instead of a Rolex?
Even now it would be hard to justify a $100k car as a business expense, with a simplified sales and property tax code it would be even easier to stop.
yummyfajitas was right: consumption taxes are generally considered regressive. Also, the rich, or even the professional class, have many more options to disguise their consumption as business expenses.