Introduction The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act on July 21, 2010 came as a necessary precaution after the recession saw to the loss of more than eight million jobs in the United States of America (Deloitte Practitioner, 2012, p. 3). This job loss was the largest to be experienced in the United States after the famous Great Depression of the 1930s. The Obama government signed the bill into law in 2010 in order to safeguard the public from a repeat of the 2008 economic disaster that culminated in major unemployment and consequent escalation of crime and numerous other social evils. This Act has implications on non-financial sectors such as borrowers from banks for the banks shall have to pass down their excess costs while lending out or require extensive collateral. This move shall pose a challenge to high-risk borrowers. Sectors such as pharmaceuticals that deal in OTC (over the counter prescriptions) shall also be subjected to stringent checks. Senator Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT) and the U.S. Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) were the main sponsors of this Act, which underscores why it was named after them. It was proposed in the fall of 2009 and passed by President Barrack Obama a year later (Deutsche Bank, July 2010, p. 35).This paper shall review certain relevant provisions exhaustively including the following titles: IX, VII, VI, and IV. Additionally, it shall outline the major objectives of the Act, the tracking of the Act, since signing to date, include the policy analysis and relate it to both the business world and society, and finally conclude by its strengths, weaknesses, and the recommendations proposed for future legislators. Objectives Following the 2007-2008 economic sector avalanche, the DFA came in to save the day, mainly by protecting consumers from the “too big to fail” dogma that had seen many consumers suffering great losses as they tried to buffer the losses created by the recession (Dodd, 2010, p. 24). Additionally, the Act aims at preventing “bail-out” at the expense of taxpayers. Initially, the failing firms looked to taxpayers’ money to bail them out of crises. Towards this end, the main objectives of the Act include:  1. The protection of US consumers from abusive financial services  2. Bring to an end the concept of “too big to fail” that saw to the great losses imposed on taxpayers by the failure of large financial institutions  3. Create a comprehensive advance alert system that shall prevent retrogressive actions or mere reactions to a failed system. At its worst, such a system should enable the other institutions that are yet unaffected to run for cover in good time.  4. The introduction of transparency to derivatives and other poisonous instruments such as Over the Counter products and ensure that they do not contaminate the entire financial system again.  5. Make the credit rating parties more accountable to the publics and authorities that they serve, thus ensure that these parties do not continue to misrepresent investment information, thus mislead investors seeking out mortgage backed investments and all other sorts of investments.  6. Grant shareholders a say in the executive remuneration decis