Yes, I am working on the Safe team.
So actually it doesn’t matter if you trigger the withdrawal from a private key based account (e.g. MetaMask) or a contract account (e.g. a Safe). Since the hardfork it became a little tricky if you try to withdraw to ANY contract account (as mentioned above because of EIP-2929). This is because the gas gosts have been increased when accessing an account for the first time in a transaction.
Therefore one solution would be to trigger the withdrawal from the reveiving contract if that is possible (e.g. if it is a Safe and you control the Safe that you want to withdraw to).
The other solution is to use the access list feature introduced with EIP-2930, to “pre-load” the contract of the account you want to withdraw to (therefore the gas costs are lower during runtime again).
The second solution is currently not possible with MetaMask afaik (they should be working on it, as this will become the new standard in the long run). You would have to use an extra tool with your private key to make this work.
Edit: if you prefer a more direct communication you can hop to chat.gnosis.io and join the #safe channel. I would later cross post the solution here
Gnosis multisig doesn’t have the receive or fallback method accordingly implemented for a simple address.send call does it not work as expected . The Safe implements a payable fallback function, so this is not the cause. I am very sure that this is related to EIP-2929 and can be solved using EIP-2930