The prediction was explicitly conditional: Sacks said that if Democrats held the presidency and both chambers of Congress in 2024, and did so without Manchin and Sinema, one should “price in the strong possibility” that a wealth‑tax‑style measure on unrealized gains would pass.

In reality, the condition did not occur:

• In the 2024 elections, Republicans won the presidency and gained control of both the Senate and the House, producing a Republican rather than Democratic trifecta for the 119th Congress.(en.wikipedia.org)

In the actual 119th Congress under this GOP trifecta:

• Congress passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which largely extends and expands Republican-style tax cuts; it does not create any federal tax on unrealized gains or a wealth tax.(en.wikipedia.org)
• As of October 2025, there is still no federal wealth tax in the United States; wealth-tax or unrealized-gains proposals (such as Biden’s “Billionaire Minimum Income Tax” and H.R. 6498) have been introduced but have not been enacted into law.(taxrep.us)

However, Sacks’s statement was not that such a tax would pass in the real world unconditionally; it was that if Democrats held a Biden-led trifecta without Manchin/Sinema, there would be a high likelihood ("strong possibility") of passage. Because that underlying political scenario never materialized, we have no way to observe whether his conditional probability assessment was accurate.

Therefore, the prediction cannot be scored as right or wrong based on actual outcomes and is best classified as ambiguous rather than correct, incorrect, or merely “too early.”