Can anyone which fallacy this is please

First off, the argument is ambigous. Does the second premise mean that power corrupts some people or all people? If it's the former, the argument is invalid as the conclusion seems to refer to all beautiful people, you can't deduce a universal property from a particular one (I couldn't find anything specific, so I'd say it's a non sequitur).

If it's the latter, then, while the argument is valid, there's no evidence provided for either of the premises, so they're unsupported claims. I'd also say it's a case of stereotyping (the fallacy), as the premises make general claims based on stereotypes (like "powerful people are corrupt").

P1) Beauty is power

P2) Power corrupts people

C) Therefore beautiful people are corrupt

P1) doesn't necessarily relate to P2). This is because while beauty may be one form of power, we cannot assume it is the only one! There may be others, like wealth, influence, or intelligence. Thus, even if power corrupts people, it isn't necessarily true that it is the beauty form of power that is corrupting people.

This also leads to a non sequitur moving from P2) to C). If the beauty form of power is not the one corrupting people, then it does not follow that beautiful people are corrupt. 

Circulus in Demonstrando

"Beauty is power. "

"Power corrupts people.  "

"Therefore,  beautiful people are corrupt. "

The conclusion should be "powerful people are corrupt." They may or may not be beautiful.