In addition to that, which one could reasonably assume they had had pressure from their government, they are very pro-taint in general. In this post, you can find brilliant findings from the Max Hillebrand's podcast (a Wasabi dev), in which it is demonstrated that not only don't zkSNACKs treat each coin equally, but they're thinking of introducing the option for each client to approve and disapprove with whom they will do coinjoin.

Another good finding in the next post, in which Max admits blockchain analysis produces false positives and could treat an innocent individual as criminal, but they nonetheless fund it, and are quite happy with criminals being blacklisted as well. If you search on Kruw's posts in this board, you can find quite a lot of assertions of him being satisfied with tainted coin owners being deprived the right for privacy.

But, no. "Privacy for everyone in the digital age"! 

That sums it up perfectly. Taint is simply inaccurate, because, to begin with, you can't tell with certainty whether a bitcoin changes hands.