Stop changing your posts!The above is misleading. As @marduk has keenly pointed out in the past, the mere fact that our very physical sensory systems are connected in some as of yet undetermined way with phenomenality means that phenomenality must be physical in nature. If it weren't, then our very physical sensory systems would not play any part in our experience of phenomenality. But they obviously do. Therefore the premise or "assumption" made at the start ( above ) cannot be correct.
The flaw is in the reasoning that an identicalness to phenomenality is required in order for it to be considered "physical". Let's look at that time tested analogy you find so annoying again: Magnetism is not identical to a magnet, therefore magnetism is not physical? Incorrect. Magnetism isn't a magnetic material like ALNICO, but I don't know of any physicist who would say it's not part of the "physical" world.
The only requirement for something to part of physical world is that it can be detected in our physical world, and phenomenality is no exception, unless that is, one subscribes to the notion that nobody including one's self is detecting anything physical because everything, including materials, are all purely mental fabrications. I cannot prove that is not the case. But not being able to prove that doesn't make it true either.