While scholars traditionally expected EU policy-making in the area of asylum to produce lowest common denominator standards, recent studies on the first phase of the Common European Asylum System have observed higher asylum standards in some instances. This article aims at explaining this divergence. Drawing on concepts of regulatory expertise and ‘misfit’, it argues that the observed variation in policy output can be explained by the dominance of a few (Northern) member states which were highly successful in inserting their positions in the core EU directives. Government effectiveness and exposure to the phenomenon entailing regulatory expertise provide a powerful explanation for member states being effective policy-shapers. Characterized by low levels of government effectiveness and exposure in the asylum area, Southern European countries were, on the contrary, rather passive during the negotiations and barely left any mark on the EU directives.