Governments can utilise fiscal measures, through subsidies and taxes, to promote healthy and environmentally sustainable food choices. Despite their potential, implementing subsidies and taxes is often contested because of the cost, anticipated efficacy, ideological basis of these policies, and the wide range of ways they might be implemented. Deliberative methods are useful for converging debate to understand whether and how policy decisions on contentious issues are supported by the public. In October 2023, we held two deliberative forums with members of the public in UK locations experiencing high rates of deprivation: one in Govanhill, Glasgow (n = 13) and one in Bridlington (n = 11). We developed 16 food subsidy or tax scenarios from a systematic scoping review of the literature. We presented scientific evidence on related issues and facilitated deliberations, culminating in each forum ranking their preferred subsidy or tax scenarios. Though each forum's preferences differed, overall participants favoured the implementation of a population-wide tax on high carbon foods, preferred more subsidy than tax scenarios, and preferred population-wide policies to policies that targeted people experiencing low income. Our findings demonstrate the public's interest in government fiscal action to create a fairer, healthier, and more sustainable food system.