How the hell do you do that without knowing how much equity he had in any given property?
According to several reports of it I just read, the fine amount was based on how much they estimated he benefited from overvaluing his assets, not based on any sort of formula that is tied to his net worth, or equity in those properties. They estimated how much he overvalued his assets, but you don’t have to know equity amounts in order to do that. If the claimed value is significantly greater than a property is worth at 100% equity ownership, there’s no need to look further.
As I said, if you can provide any evidence that they actually looked into equity ownership, which was not needed to perform the analysis they conducted, I’ll gladly concede the point. But until then, there’s no evidence they did, or needed to.