seven most recent tax years. Added by the Act of December 21, 1998, P.L. 1225, 72 P.S. § 5490.5a. 4 . Where the question is one of statutory construction this Court’s review is plenary as it poses a pure issue of law. Frank Bryan, Inc. v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Bryan, Dec.d.), 921 A.2d 546, 549 n. 4 (Pa.Cmwlth.2007). 5 . While not employing the express word, "provided,” the sentence preceding Subsection (i) functions as a proviso. The natural and appropriate use of a proviso is to restrain or qualify some preceding matter, 1 Pa.C.S. § 1924, and it is generally confined to that which precedes it, unless it is clear that it was intended to apply to a subsequent matter. Orlosky, 304 Pa. at 62, 155 A. at 113. 6 . See also In re Appeal of Martin, 830 A.2d 616 (Pa.Cmwlth.2003) (<HOLDING>); Moyer v. Berks County Board of Assessment
holding that prejudgment interest should not be calculated based on a monthbymonth basis holding that plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount to be calculated on the involuntary loan theory holding that the defendants sentence was based on the career offender guidelines despite the fact that the district court calculated an offense level pursuant to the crack guidelines holding that rollback taxes are calculated on the basis of the entire tract from which the splitoff parcel was created holding that prejudgment interest should not be calculated based on a paycheckbypaycheck basis