So, the idea is to make one of the stronger methods of avoiding being spied on to be a privilege only available to people with enough means to be able to pay for it?

This is directly backward from the way it should work. You shouldn't have to incur a formal financial penalty just because you want to minimize the amount of spying you're subjected to.

This has implications for more than just the inability of the poor to have any privacy. If you impose a deterrent to the anonymous payment method then it becomes less widely used and less widely supported, creating more barriers for the people with sufficient legitimate need for anonymity that they would suffer the additional fee in itself, and making them stand out more.

There was a time that taxes were extorted through force by strongmen and it was immoral. But now "nationalism" created these pseudomoralists that bend over backward to justify the morality for extorsion

also see "pay for indulgences" for a preview of Chapter 2