OK, let's give our Sacred Bands BAR for the same reasons....
Well, to be fair there is an academic debate about just what is meant by 'Macedonian" style in Xanthippus' reforms of the Carthaginian army. The consensus is combined arms, but for a long time scholars did not believe that. Therefore, older ranges/army lists of Carthaginians forces make sense to have Phalangites as a limited unit type.
Secondly, we know a few things about the Carthaginian military:
1. They were not above stealing a good idea. After all, in Sicily they decided to adopt the Greek Hoplite formation after seeing its effectiveness at the battle of Himera. Or so the legend goes.
2. The Macedonian Phalanx was a very popular military formation in the Eastern Mediterranean. Therefore, the Carthaginians probably had been exposed to it in their travels and via their trade routes.
3. They used Mercenaries heavily after the Sicilian Wars and Greek Hoplites and Macedonian Phalangites were known mercenaries.
That being said, there is little evidence that the Carthaginians "Adopted" this approach, but ancient history has huge gaps in it where the only real answer is.... we just do not know. Currently, the scholarly consensus does not support the idea, but new evidence may change "current" thinking.
On a related note, the idea that Carthage heavily used "Mercenaries" maybe an overstatement. After all, what Rome called Mercenaries may have been troops from Allied client kingdoms (Like Numidians), subject people such as North Africans, and allied tribes (such as Iberians and Gauls). To call them all "Mercenary" is probably a gross over-simplification of the structure of the Punic armies. The Carthaginian army was probably no more 'Merceanry" than a Roman army. However, I digress as that is a topic for another post and time.