Powell

MEMORANDUM **

Roy Gibbons Powell and Dixie Lee Powell appeal pro se the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the United States, which reduced to judgment certain federal income taxes and interest assessed against the Powells. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and, after de novo review, see Hansen v. United States, 7 F.3d 137, 138 (9th Cir.1993) (per curiam), we affirm.

The district court correctly granted the United States summary judgment as to the validity of the tax assessments against the Powells because the Powells failed to rebut the presumption that the tax assess- *425 merits were accurate. See Palmer v. IRS, 116 F.3d 1309 , 1312 (9th Cir.1997). In addition, the Powells failed to come forward with any evidence to rebut the presumption that they received the requisite notice and demand for payment pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6303 . See Hughes v. United States, 953 F.2d 531, 536 (9th Cir.1992). The district court also correctly found that the Motoqua Common Law Trust was the Powells’ alter ego, cf. Standage v. Standage, 147 Ariz. 473 , 711 P.2d 612, 615 (Ariz. Ct.App.1985), and therefore could be levied to pay the-assessments, see Wolfe v.…