Yes. A person can generally transfer real estate to a relative while retaining a secured interest in the property, although the exact structure and consequences depend heavily on the jurisdiction.
For example, suppose A owns property worth $400,000 and wants B to become the owner, but wants A to receive $200,000 if the property is later sold. One possible structure is for A to convey title to B while B executes a mortgage/deed of trust or other permitted security instrument securing a $200,000 obligation to A. The security interest would normally be recorded in the land records.
B would then own the property, but the property would be encumbered. If B later sold it, the lien would generally have to be satisfied or otherwise dealt with so that the buyer could receive clear title. The documents would need to specify exactly when the $200,000 becomes payable—for example, upon sale, transfer, refinancing, or another defined event.
There is an important distinction between saying, “I give you the property but want half its value if you sell it,” and creating an enforceable debt secured by the property. A lawyer would normally document the underlying obligation as well as the lien rather than relying upon an informal condition attached to the gift. Tax consequences can also be significant because a transfer involving an assumed debt or retained economic interest may not be treated the same way as an uncomplicated gift.
The corporate example makes the situation substantially different. If a corporation owns the real estate, the two relatives who own the corporation do not personally own the real estate. The corporation does. Consequently, transferring shares of the corporation to the relative is not the same transaction as transferring the property.
There are several possible structures:
Property transfer: The corporation conveys the property to the relative. This can create corporate, tax, creditor, and potentially shareholder issues because the corporation is disposing of its asset.
Share transfer: The relatives give the recipient some or all of their corporate shares. The corporation continues owning the property, so a lien against the recipient's shares is fundamentally different from a lien against the real estate itself.
Corporation retains ownership: Ownership interests in the corporation can be reorganized and a shareholder agreement can restrict transfers or establish buyout rights. Again, however, the recipient owns shares rather than the underlying property.
So the proposed arrangement is certainly possible in principle, but the phrase “gift property with a lien for half its value” leaves several important legal questions unanswered. The parties should determine whether the 50% represents an actual debt, whether it is fixed at the property's value on the transfer date or changes with future value, what events trigger repayment, what happens upon death or refinancing, and whether the recipient can further mortgage the property.
For a significant property, this should be structured by a real-estate and tax attorney before the deed is transferred. The corporate ownership aspect in particular can produce very different tax and legal consequences from a direct gift between individuals.
