All rights have limits, including free speech and privacy. We can discuss where those lines should be, but by precedent it's established that public figures have reduced privacy rights because it serves the public interest.

It's clear at this point that extremely wealthy figures should expect reduced privacy rights when it come to their wealth because it serves the public interest.

You're basically arguing that the public shouldn't be aware whether a person owns a nuclear weapon because they bought it fair and square and "privacy".

All rights do have limits, but this is too soft a limit for me, personally. I can understand how someone who is a well-known public figure would give up some rights related to slander, or being photographed, or whatever. But we're talking about private tax data, secured by the IRS. Guesses based on what someone makes based on or derived from publicly-available information I can understand, but leaked private tax documents crosses a line I'm not comfortable with. I do understand that others might think differently on this topic, though.

All tax records are public in some developed countries. This is a cultural line that should be moved IMO. Maybe not all the way to full public disclosure of all records, but certainly away from the status quo. Government transparency is good.