Regarding the expansion. Electric, magnetic and toroidal multipoles provide complete basis, so any non-static charge-current configuration can be written in terms of these multipoles, but only if you avoid taking the zero size approximation. If you do take the zero-size approximation, as is usually done, you will also get the mean-radii corrections (of toroidal and magnetic kind). Confusing, but such is life. There have been several works on this. I prefer this one:
E. E. Radescu and G. Vaman, Phys. Rev. E 65, 046609 (2002)
https://journals.aps.org/pre/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevE.65.046609
The closed loops of toroid are sometimes known as super-toroids. These fractal-like extensions can be expanded in terms of the three multipole families if you include the mean radii (Phys Rev A 98, 023858 (2018)
https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.98.023858)
In the static case you also get the electric toroidal multipoles. Which is even more confusing, but there is a simple way to explain it in terms of group theory. Multipoles are always irreducible representations of the SO(3) group (rotations). But SO(3) is not the full symmetry group of Maxwell's equations - you also have spatial inversion (parity, P) and time reversal (T). Now, if you consider the combined PT group it will be Abelian and will have 4 elements (Identity, P, T, PT) - so there will be four irreducible representations. Now if you combine these represenations with the irreps of SO(3) you get :
electric multipoles (changes sign under P, not under T)
magnetic multipoles (changes sign under T, not under P)
toroidal multipoles (changes sign under P and under T)
electric toroidal multipoles (does not change sign)
In the dynamic case, time-reversal makes no sense, so magnetic multipoles and electric toroidal multipoles are undistinguishable. See Phys. Rev. B 98, 165110 (2018) and refs within.
Coming up with toroidal multipoles. They have been re-discovered several times. Zeldovich came up with anapole, or toroidal dipole, when looking for something that would explain the parity-violation experiment. Reading his original paper the logic was, I think, that the necessary term in the Lagrangian must not vanish under PT, but must vanish under P - toroidal dipole is the simplest algebraic term that fits the bill. Other re-discoveries were both 'geometrical' and algebraic, but mostly algebraic, because the concept of toroidal/anapole multipoles was first developed in the particle/nuclear physics community (traditionally strong grasp on tensor algebra and representation theory).