Resource transfers from developed to developing countries to help prevent and adapt to climate change play a central role in international climate policy efforts. At the same time, countries are domestically grappling with how to provide these transfers, if at all. A growing literature explores the economic logics and efficiency of international climate finance, yet the politics are particularly difficult, partly because publics are often biased towards policy at home rather than abroad. This paper examines how the design of climate support packages influences public support for them using original survey evidence from the United States and India. We find compelling evidence that efficiency considerations do not drive preferences toward climate transfers. Economic costs, while certainly salient, only explain part of the public attitudes towards climate investments. Instead, salient in voters’ minds are climate justice considerations that take into account vulnerability and compensation, along with with other normative factors such as reciprocity by other developed countries and domestic agency in structuring the design of transfers. Taken together, the evidence indicates that political attributes are key determinants that can unlock public support for cross-border climate cooperation. We shed theoretical and empirical light on these political dimensions of climate finance that could ignite more interest in supporting climate action abroad.