Lack of fungibility seems to be a double-edged sword. The transparent ledger means it's not a safe harbor for criminals, which would be a much easier argument to make of something like Monero if it was threatening the dollar. On the other hand, I think it's reasonable that even non-custodial bitcoin, despite its sound money qualities, could be co-opted by a surveillance state. From my research, Whirlpool and lightning aren't really enough to guarantee privacy unless you really know what you're doing and are exceedingly careful.

Yep, this is the way I expect them to fight Bitcoin. The first things you mentioned really only affects the regulated exchanges; the on and off ramps in and out of fiat. The fact that it can be easily converted into and out of fiat is alot of bitcoin's value, and therefore, such a thing would negatively affect the price. Tax reporting requirements is highly reducing bitcoin as a medium of exchange in the US and many other jurisdictions. But i guess thats only if they are KYC sats. But most probably are. As far as the fractional reserving, I remember back when Max Keiser, before he was a bitcoin guy, was encouraging people to request physical delivery of their gold and silver. Luckily, it's more practical to withdraw bitcoin. At least at the moment. I'd like to think that people would try to withdraw at the first sine of funny buisiness. But yeah, what you mentioned is what I think will be the government's strategy for fighting bitcoin moving forward.