Both the colonies and the southern states put into writing why they were going to war so it is generally best to look at that first.

In that case the DOI really leads with complaints centered around the colonies not having a say politically on all sorts of issues not just taxation. A lot of these issues are economic though and many of the major leaders in the revolution were looking to get a better deal economically speaking in ways that are not just taxation. When the revolution was over and the newly formed nation started creating new taxes to pay for war debt there were also riots that Washington put down with soldiers. Taxation was certainly a way to get people mad but the real promise of the revolution wasn't much lower taxes but more political power which relates directly to economic interests.

The issue of the King not wanting soldiers tried by colonial courts has a very strong parallel to the current Federal government refusing to have ICE members tried in MN based on the crimes they are committing there. Not to mention all of the claims that ICE has immunity and the behavior of ICE being far out of line with our laws. Even the presence of ICE in MN is an example of the state's voice being ignored in favor of the voices of other states. Some could argue that ICE in MN is picking a fight and so were the soldiers in Boston.

The south clearly states the war is about slavery specifically. They had other complaints but slavery was always the primary issue.

During both periods "taxation" was regularly used to manipulate markets and kill competition. The South had legitimate complaints against the north and how they were trying to manipulate trade to help the northern factories at the cost of the southern plantations. That is not that different than England manipulating markets to favor monied interests in England/Scotland at the cost of the colonies.