Radical calls for a tax on sugary and salty snacks would only add £1 onto a £90 weekly shop, Boris Johnson's food tsar has said.
Henry Dimbleby, co-founder of the food chain Leon, insisted his proposals for a sugar and salt reformulation levy would not hike up prices for families.
His new National Food Strategy demands a major overhaul of the nation's diet, including slashing meat consumption and GP pilots for prescribing fruit and vegetables.
It warns that how and what we eat is contributing to 64,000 deaths a year in England and driving wildlife loss and climate change.
The so-called snack tax would raise up to £3.4bn for the Treasury per year, the report claims, which could be spent on a massive expansion of free school meals, funding holiday clubs and food support for poor families.
Get a daily morning politics briefing straight to your inbox. Sign up for the free Mirror Politics newsletter
But the plan has triggered criticism from some industry groups that it could increase prices for consumers.
The TaxPayer's Alliance suggested the move could cost the average household £172 per year, increasing the cost of sugary breakfast cereals, Ketchup, and sweets and chocolate.
Asked about the claims, Mr Dimbleby told the Today programme: "If you look at an average shopping basket for a family of 2.4, average family, is about £90 - £95 a week.
"If you take the worst case scenario, that might go up by a pound."
Mr Dimbleby said the price of a Mars Bar was unlikely to go up as manufacturers could reduce the amount of sugar but products like Frosties would be more difficult to change.
"We do not believe for most things it will hike the price. What it will do is it will reformulate, it will make people take sugar and salt out," he said.
"There is huge scope for reformulation. There may be some products that you can't reformulate like Frosties, which is basically pure sugar, is going to be hard to reformulate right.
"But the question you have to ask then is, is the freedom to keep Frosties cheap worth destroying the NHS for?"
The Food and Drink Federation warned that cost increases could be passed onto shoppers as the sector faces continuing pressures from the pandemic.
FDF’s Chief Scientific Officer, Kate Halliwell, said: "Food and drink manufacturers welcome the intent to bring forward measures which will help to increase access and affordability of food and drink for children and families on lower incomes.
“In contrast to this, a salt and sugar tax will ultimately impact those families who are already struggling to make ends meet, by making food and drink more expensive.
"After many years of cost pressures, businesses in our sector are already operating on very tight margins, and any further costs would simply have to be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher food prices."
She said reformulation takes time to achieve - and insisted manufacturers had been voluntarily making their recipes more healthy.
The proposals will be considered by the Government, which will respond with a white paper in six months time.
But Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick struck a less than enthusiastic note when questioned on the new strategy.
He told LBC Radio: "I think you have to be very cautious before putting burdens on members of the public, particularly those on lower incomes.
"I do think you have to be very careful about going down that route because I don't want to make life more difficult for people on low incomes."
