*963 MEMORANDUM **

Dan Pickell appeals pro se from the tax court’s order dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his petition for relief from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s attempts to collect his federal income tax liabilities for tax years 2000 through 2008. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review de novo. Gorospe v. Comm’r, 451 F.3d 966, 968 (9th Cir. 2006). We affirm.

The tax court properly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction because Pickell was never issued a “Notice of Determination” regarding the levies. See 26 U.S.C. § 6330(d). Contrary to Pickell’s arguments, the tax court properly determined that the Commissioner sent a final notice of intent to levy to Pickell’s last known address. See United States v. Zolla, 724 F.2d 808, 810 (9th Cir. 1984) (holding that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Commissioner’s evidence of compliance with official mail procedures is sufficient to establish that notices were properly made).

Pickell’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.