That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that it constitutes a regressive tax on a life essential - food - for the sole benefit of a politically powerfu

That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that it constitutes a regressive tax on a life essential - food - for the sole benefit of a politically powerful minority lobby - food processors. In the country of my birth, until about 50 years ago, the shoe-making industry was considered important - and the producers managed to convince the government that a tarrif on shoes would protect a vital national industry and all the associated jobs. And indeed it did; but the result is plain in photos from the era; most people wore old worn out shoes particularly the poor. Personally I think to deprive the relatively poor of access to cheap foreign food/clothes/etc. to ensure a tiny segment of the population is "protected" is immoral. But the political power of industrialists in concert with labour unions is formiddable.