It's only a good idea if everybody agrees to it otherwise it is likely to cause some issues with the team dynamics.
Consider these scenarios:
Person X is late to a meeting due to an unforeseen traffic accident causing them to be delayed.
Its not their fault they are late, there isn't anything they could do about it. Yet they are punished for this.
Punishing people for things that are out of their control will only cause disarray in the team and cause unnecessary friction in an already busy or high pressure environment
Person X is late to a meeting and brings chocolate with him. But Person Y is allergic to dairy products. So next time someone is late they bring a bag of mixed nuts but Person Z is allergic to those.
Now anyone who is late has to go out of their way to find something to bring to meet everyone's eating requirements. Pushing the cost up exponentially.
If everyone's eating habits aren't catered to, then you are unfairly segregating those people.
You could argue that the higher costs for needing to cater to everyone is even more likely to encourage being on time. But what about the first scenario? When it isn't their fault?
Person X is late to a meeting, but due to an increase in taxes, a cut in pay, and a new baby on the way they don't have the money to spare to bring delicacies for people. So you allow Person X to not be part of this, now X has no 'incentives' to be on time, and Y and Z are unhappy that they still have to pay for being late
This causes friction in the team and their productivity decreases as everyone is harboring personal grudges.
Ok so having a meeting first thing in the morning poses problems. Specifically because sometimes there are things out of their control that cause them to be delayed.
So first option is push the meeting back 10-20 minutes and keep the punishments, the second option is to keep the meeting where it is but remove the punishments.
Keeping the Punishments, moving the meeting
O.k so you have decided to move the meeting to allow for unforeseen incidents but you've decided to keep the punishments if people are late.
But what about these scenarios?
Person X is 10 minutes late to a meeting because they were busy finishing fixing a Priority 1 incident which was causing a client to lose money by the second.
Person Y is 5 minutes late to same meeting because they ate a properly uncooked batch of fish and have been feeling a bit off.
Eventually you find yourself needing to draw lines. Is it the last person to turn up who has to pay? Is it the person who wasn't on an urgent call? Is it the person who wasn't doing something for a client? What about those who are ill? Busy? Swamped? Caught by a more senior person for a talk in the hall on the way there?
There are too many rules to remember, too many situations that work or don't work.
At the end of the day you are avoiding the cause of the problem. Why aren't these people on time?
Perhaps it's not a high enough priority for them. If they are working on more than one project and they are nearing the end of a section of their work people find it more acceptable to finish that work then go to the meeting.
This prevents people from losing their trail of thought. Not to mention that actual work on a project is usually prioritized over a discussion about work for a project. It's just common sense because it has the highest Return on Effort.
Maybe these people feel they don't have a purpose in the meeting. Why are they there? Are they able to contribute properly to the meeting or have you dragged them along because there is a potential for them to be useful for 5 minutes, maybe.
This causes people to zone out during the meetings, then be less inclined to even turn up on time, they feel their time is wasted.
Maybe these people are too busy. If they have 5 on going projects, all with short deadlines as well as a plethora of meetings to attend and documents to review and estimates to give, then of course they are going to be late.
Maybe these people are just poorly organised and forget when things are. In which case, is the company / manager doing as much as they can to help? Providing time management tools for example. Hell, even Outlook is capable of dropping meeting reminders and storing flags.
At the end of the day you're trying to punish people for being late, rather than trying to remove the obstacle that causes them to be late
Which is the equivalent of whipping a donkey for falling to the floor, ignoring the fact that it fell because you loaded it up with more than it could carry.
So in conclusion I don't think its appropriate, you're trying to impose a punishment to stop something that has already happened, rather than trying to stop it from happening in the first place.
You want my advice? Simply ask them why they are late. You'll find they will either give an answer, which aids you in solving the root cause, or they will repeatedly say "i dont know" which allows their manager to take more appropriate actions.