I am not sure what other posts you have reviewed, but the standard literature covering SI units, also make clear that the SI units of mole and candela are redundant and solely made for convenience.
Your question is thus actually down to
Are all physical constants expressible in terms of the fundamental 5 SI units?
in which case the answer is yes, for now. That is, before we had the technical precision to base SI units in terms of physical constants, we already successfully defined the units of all known physical constants in terms of SI units, and so unless we discover new physics and new physical constants, all other constants are already expressed.
I am a theorist myself, and it would have made theorists' life a lot better if everybody migrated to natural units. However, the main jobs of a unit system are
- to be standardised,
- to greatest precision,
- and be in widespread use.
- Be relatively clear and not error-prone.
Everything else pales in comparison. It is the engineering industry (and science along with it) that requires the greatest precision, and only if precise measurements of the physical constants allow us to use them as the definition of the units, are we actually industrially allowed to define units via physical constants.
You might be wondering where my theorist jab came from. It actually matters: Modern physics now understands that temperature is just a Boltzmann's constant away from energy, and so temperature should be measured in Joules (or energy in Kelvins, whichever is preferred). Similarly, either we all move to measure in lightseconds, or in lightmetres, etc. Defining things properly in the theorist's garden, then, would be that all units except one will be fixed, and while we are at it, we might as well set the last one too. And then nothing will have units. i.e. what you call "base" or "fundamental", in the context of unit systems, are all nonsense.