Interesting. $\newcommand{\prox}{\mathrm{prox}}\newcommand\inner[1]{\left\langle #1 \right\rangle}$
Note that if $f$ is nonconvex then $\prox_f(x)$ might not be a singleton, thus the question of interest becomes whether the following holds:
\begin{equation}
x \in \prox_f(x) + \prox_{f^*}(x).\tag{*}\label{moreau}
\end{equation}
With some further assumptions on $f$ (and $x$), the answer is affirmative.
Denote $d_x(y) = \frac{1}{2}\|y-x\|^2$. We have (see \eqref{optimality} below):
$$z\in \prox_f(x) \iff z\in \arg\min_{y} \left\{f(y) + d_x(y)\right\} \iff 0\in\partial(f + d_x)(z).$$
Since $f$ is nonconvex, the inclusion $\partial f(z) + \partial d_x(z) \subset \partial(f + d_x)(z)$ may be proper, e.g. when $\partial f(z) = \emptyset$. Clearly, for any $z\in \prox_f(x)$, the set $\partial(f + d_x)(z)$ is non-empty because it contains $0$. Now, if we assume that there exists $z$ such that the element $0$ belongs to the subset $\partial f(z) + \partial d_x(z)$, then \eqref{moreau} holds. Note that this assumption holds if $f$ is convex.
The result can be proved by noticing that some convex analysis results can be extended to nonconvex functions, as follows.
Fact 1. The first-order optimality condition also holds for a nonconvex function:
\begin{equation}
x^* \in\arg\min_x f(x) \iff 0\in\partial f(x^*). \tag{1}\label{optimality}
\end{equation}
This follows directly from the definition of the subgradient.
Fact 2. The Fenchel–Young inequality also holds for a nonconvex function:
\begin{equation}
f(x) + f^*(u) \ge \inner{u,x} \ \forall x,u. \tag{2}\label{fenchel}
\end{equation}
This follows directly from the definition of the conjugate.
Fact 3. The equality case in the Fenchel–Young inequality is the same for a nonconvex function:
\begin{equation}
f(x)+f^*(u) = \inner{x,u} \Longleftrightarrow u \in \partial f(x). \tag{3}\label{fenchel-equality}
\end{equation}
See here for a proof.
Now back to the main result. Let $z$ be such that $0\in\partial f(z) + \partial d_x(z)$. Because $\partial f(z) + \partial d_x(z) \subset \partial(f + d_x)(z)$ we have $0 \in \partial(f + d_x)(z)$ and thus $z\in\prox_f(x)$ according to \eqref{optimality}.
Denote $u=x-z$. Notice that $\partial d_x(z) = \{z - x\}$, we have $0\in\partial f(z) + z-x$, i.e. $\boxed{u \in \partial f(z)}$ and thus according to \eqref{fenchel-equality} we have
\begin{equation}
\inner{z,u} = f(z)+f^*(u). \tag{4}\label{zu}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, according to \eqref{fenchel}:
\begin{equation}
f(z) + f^*(v) \ge \inner{v,z} \ \forall v. \tag{5}\label{zv}
\end{equation}
Summing \eqref{zu} and \eqref{zv} we obtain:
\begin{equation}
f^*(v) \ge f^*(u) + \inner{z, v-u} \ \forall v,
\end{equation}
which means $\boxed{z\in\partial f^*(u)}$, implying
\begin{align}
x-u \in\partial f^*(u)
\implies &0\in\partial f^*(u) + u-x \\
\implies &0 \in\partial f^*(u) + \partial d_x(u) \\
\implies &0\in \partial (f^* + d_x) (u) \\
\implies &u = \prox_{f^*}(x).
\end{align}
Therefore we have proved that $x=z+u \in \prox_f(x) + \prox_{f^*}(x)$. QED
I would say that the above is quite straightforward. A complete answer should provide a counter-example to \eqref{moreau} (if such example exists), or at least provide more insight into the assumption $\exists z: 0\in\partial f(z) + \partial d_x(z)$. Although I think this assumption is rather weak, I'm unable to say more.
P/s: From the proof, we have the following.
Fact 4. The following implication holds for a nonconvex function:
\begin{equation}
u\in\partial f(z) \implies z\in\partial f^*(u).
\end{equation}
If $f$ is convex then the converse also holds.
Update
In the above, I immediately generalized the Moreau decomposition to the inclusion \eqref{moreau} because of the nonconvexity of $f$. However, since Regev assumed that everything is well defined in his question, another more restricted view would be to assume that $\prox_f(x)$ is a singleton (as confirmed by Regev in his/her recent comment) so that the equality is kept instead of an inclusion:
\begin{equation}
x =\prox_f(x) + \prox_{f^*}(x).\tag{**}\label{moreau-equality}
\end{equation}
If we assume further that the subdifferential $\partial f(z)$ is non-empty (which is a very mild assumption), then \eqref{moreau-equality} actually holds.
Corollary. If $\prox_f(x)$ is a singleton and the subdifferential $\partial f(\prox_f(x))$ is non-empty, then the Moreau decomposition \eqref{moreau-equality} holds.
Proof. Denote $z = \prox_f(x)$. Because $\prox_f(x)$ is a singleton, according to the above reasoning, we have $\partial(f + d_x)(z) = 0$ (with a slight abuse of notation, we denote the singleton set by the element itself). Hence, because $\partial f(z) \neq \emptyset$ and $\partial f(z) + \partial d_x(z) \subset \partial(f + d_x)(z) = 0$, the subdifferential $\partial f(z)$ must also be a singleton, and furthermore $\partial f(z) + \partial d_x(z) = 0$. This clearly satisfies the assumption made in the previous section and therefore we obtain \eqref{moreau-equality}.
The answer is now complete.
