Global crises have increased both the need for and the politicization of transnational governance. In line with this, efforts have been made to generate public legitimacy for transnational governance, especially at the EU level. At the same time, there is a significant gap in understanding what citizens expect from transnational democracy. A recent study by Ghassim and Pauli (2024) shows strong public support for a world government. But it remains unclear how exactly that government should look, and how people would react to trade-offs connected to national sovereignty or wealth redistribution. This paper addresses this gap by introducing an innovative measurement of regime preferences for global and EU democracy. Using a survey and conjoint experiment in Germany and Poland, it captures what type of supranational democracy people would endorse and why. I find surprising commonalities despite both countries’ diverging stance on EU integration: polycentric solutions involving multiple decision-makers are preferred over centralized institutions or a world parliament. The paper presents these results and provides a preliminary analysis of their intersections with political attitudes (e.g. political ideology), and on conflict lines on European integration (e.g. national autonomy, free movement and wealth redistribution). Thereby, it provides for a differentiated account of EU citizens’ preferences on global democratic regimes.