This thesis explores the framing tactics used by the EU to both present and justify the proposed burden-sharing mechanism in the proposal for asylum and migration management within the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. The aim is to firstly identify the exact framing tactics used, and secondly, assess what these tactics reveal about the underlying interests and strategic goals. The theoretical foundation of this thesis lies on framing theory, and more specifically Benford and Snow’s framework of core framing tasks together with their framing processes. Discourse analysis is used to conduct a detailed analysis on the framing tactics by examining the language, narratives and framing strategies used. The findings of this thesis shows that the EU uses both strategic and descriptive framing tactics in presenting and justifying the new burden-sharing mechanisms, and the use of framing tactics and their intent vary depending on which part of the proposal they are used in. It is also revealed that the proposal indirectly aims to strengthen the EU’s authority in the area of migration management, centralizing the decision-making to the EU-level. The strategic goals of the proposal also included legitimizing the new mechanisms and the promotion of solidarity and fairness as the central values of EU migration management.